• http://www.rimmkaufman.com/ George Michie

    The challenge for that approach is that you have thousands of pirates each making thousands of dollars — very difficult/inefficient for studios/publishers to go after each of these people who are nameless and faceless and hard to track. Google, on the other hand is making millions from the pirates’ AdSense and GDN ads. Much bigger target, and one that is easier to track down.

  • http://orgspring.com/ OrgSpring

    It will never happen, and for one reason only – cost. It would cost too much money to take pirates to court. EVERY studio is a vertically integrated company that reports to a parent company where the bottom line is profit.

    After the Time Warner AOL merger many years ago, then president Richard Parsons said, in regard to a journalist’s question about how the studio would handle piracy, that he’d rather release a movie straight to dvd (or straight to tv) than to push a movie to the theaters and risk piracy.

    With many more options now, like Google play store and Apple TV, to name just a few, the distribution model is much more favorable to skip theaters (and dvd’s altogether) and go straight to digital library content where the issue of piracy is, for the most part, mitigated.

    If anyone should consider suing pirates, it would be the theater chains. They stand to lose the most if the studios decide to skip theatrical releases in favor of digital libraries.

  • BMichaels

    Where have you been? Media companies like Viacom already have taken Google to court over YouTube.

  • BMichaels

    Your story takes Schmidt’s quoted statement out of context. He’s talking about profiteers from piracy such as bootleggers and sites that run for profit ads on tube sites, not your son/daughter/relative/neighbor/friend who’s watching movies for free at home.

  • Kaitensatsuma

    So….Hulu, Youtube?

  • Aholl Urang

    Coming from a rich fat guy that doesn’t care about our privacy….

  • a1brandz

    In practical it is hard to check content pirates as they are untraceable and still minting huge money.

  • Moose

    these companies don’t take them to court because the losses they make are less than taking the pirates to court! personally, i love piracy for films, tv, and music. its not like they don’t charge us enough money to watch/download, and then on top of that they slap a ton of adverts in our face! lower prices + less adverts = less piracy. ……. ITS NOT COMPLICATED.

  • http://www.kyleeggleston.com/ Kyle Eggleston

    Google doesn’t HOST anything. They index them.

  • lisa741

    just as Janice responded I am inspired that a mother can profit $9038 in 4 weeks on the computer. have you seen this site w­w­w.K­E­P­2.c­o­m

  • http://www.v2interactive.net/ Josh

    Of course he would suggest that. I wonder if he also would suggest that privacy violators be taken to court, too. Oh, how about monopolies? What a joke this company has become.

  • Ken

    These websites can never be removed because G knows these are the hot keywords people look for.