You have to love Mark Cuban, who says it like it is. At a conference yesterday, he said only a "moron" would buy YouTube. "They are just breaking the law," CNet reported. "The only reason it hasn't been sued yet is because there is nobody with big money to sue." Cuban's no-lawsuit theory may be right but isn't a little curious YouTube has escaped the wrath of copyright owners so far while Napster, et al incited a wave of lawsuits and attacks on consumers? Here's my theory at when it comes to television programs being downloaded. While people are accessing them for free, there is still advertising on them. Maybe this gives copyright owners the luxury of figuring out whether they can work with video-sharing services such as YouTube rather than suing them.
Update: Something I didn't know until today is YouTube a 100MB upload limit, which means only 10 minute video clips can be shown - perfect for segments from the Daily Show and Bill Clinton interviews on Fox; not good for The Sopranos or House episodes. Maybe this is why the TV and movie industries haven't given YouTube a difficult time legally because 10-minute clips are more marketing vehicles than threats. For more thoughts, check out Don Dodge, a former v.p. with Napster, who takes issue with many of Cuban's ideas about YouTube. The New York Times also weighs in with a story on YouTube.