The best legal defense in a copyright suit may be to say that the infringement doesn't matter. That, at least, is the route that the Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) is taking in defending a suit from Viacom Inc. (NYSE: VIA).

"Viacom's complaint threatens the way hundreds of millions of people legitimately exchange information, news, entertainment, and political and artistic expression," The Wall Street Journal [subscription required] quotes Google as saying in a court document.

Fine. But what happened to addressing the issue of illegal posting of copyrighted video?

Google's response is that it takes down video when asked to. It is a bit like saying that a parking garage will call the police after people's cars are stolen. Let thieves steal the cars. We will try to recover them after they are gone.

The YouTube model was based, in part, on users posting content from media companies. Google knew that when it bought the video-sharing company. Now, the search giant is saying that it cannot be responsible for its users breaking the rules, even when it gives them the tools and distribution network to facilitate the actions.

Seems a little thin.

Douglas A. McIntyre is a partner at 24/7 Wall St.

Google's says piracy doesn't matter originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 01 May 2007 09:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Everybody seems to think so. From message board comments saying Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO) handed Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) a present to analysts saying it clearly: Yahoo! is the real loser.

I can understand trying to block Google from gaining market share, but I can't understand buying a company just for that. Yahoo! was already third in video-sharing sites traffic and has recently improved its Yahoo! Video site with a deal with CurrentTV. So would a deal with YouTube, enhancing an already strong position, would have been the best use of the company's resources?

And would investors have been as forgiving of the $1.65 billion price tag if it was Yahoo! not Google that was forking up the bill? Mind you, Google did mention the deal would be somewhat dilutive of earnings. For Google, the accomplishes an improvement in a weak area - social networking. For Yahoo! what exactly would it have been?

The analyst that made most sense to me was Jeetil Patel from Deutsche Bank. He said that there is a difference between what drives branded advertising -- advertisers' budgets, and what drives paid search -- web distribution. From that difference, Google, and more so now with the YouTube deal, is better positioned than Yahoo!, which relies more on display ads.

If Yahoo! needs more distribution, which can never hurt, perhaps a better deal would be with Facebook given this site's unique positioning, as long as Yahoo! doesn't rush into an expensive deal of course. But first, I say, Yahoo! actually needs something to distribute and any deal might be putting the cart before the horse if Yahoo! doesn't roll out Panama soon.

Yahoo! shares closed at $24.47 today, down 56 cents or 2.24%.

Yahoo! after the bell 10-10-06: Is Yahoo! really the loser on the GooTube deal? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:01:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.