Will, thanks for this useful compendium of commentary. I'll print it out and read it all. While I'm a big fan of YouTube (especially instrumental tracks of the legendary Motown Funk Brothers!), I know from experience as a production counsel how tedious it can be for a legitimate sole rightsholder to have our own exclusive content (posted by infringers) pulled down by YouTube, as we need to first jump throught the hoops and requirements established by YouTube conform to their YouTube rules and regulations before they take action as the publisher and enabler of the infringement...and all this red tape acknowledegment has to be done through the internet...no humans involved unless you have the direct numbers to the C-Suite. As I said, I love YouTube as anyone else and it's an incomparable aggregator of "remarkable" content and powerful search engine benefitting many, but I never quite understood why the rightsholder has to honor such demanding restrictions to vindicate our undisputed rights. This happened to be a prime time PBS series soley owned by an established producer licensor, but unless we spent hours meeting the YouTube conditions the infringement would have continued!

For a less sensationalist, more legal analysis of the motions and what it means for innovation, I also highly recommend Eric Goldman's take:

http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2010/03/viacom_v_youtub.htm

Gilles.

Gilles thanks for the Eric Goldman link. Keep up great work at vuze.com.