[sarettah]

Oh my.

http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/22...ers-head-court

Upon information and belief, [the] Defendant's business plan depends on the uploading, posting, display and performance or copyrighted audiovisual works belong belonging to Vivid and others," the suit reads.

"In other words, Defendants deliberately and knowingly built a library of infringing works to draw internet traffic to the subject website, enabling them to gain an enormous share of the internet traffic, increase the value of their businesses and earn vast amounts of revenue in the process."

...........................

The case mirrors that of Viacom and YouTube, where the media giant sued the online video site for copyright infringement. Other organisations took a similar hard line and YouTube was forced to clean up its site.