Chad Hurley Quotes

The one I have the most angst towards would be YouTube. We had an opportunity to invest, and I just got nervous about the media industry's response to the unlicensed content on the site.

I'm not a big believer in our copyright laws; I find them way too restrictive.

It's the big boys, the Googles of this world, that are already benefiting from piracy and not paying the artists a dime.

I was an online service provider. It's not my job to police what people are uploading. It's the job of the content owners, and the law is very clear. If you create content, and you want to protect your copyrights, you have to do the work.

We live in a world with "free" content, and this freedom is not an imperfection. We listen to the radio without paying for the songs we hear; we hear friends humming tunes that they have not licensed. We tell jokes that reference movie plots without the permission of the directors. We read our children books, borrowed from a library, without paying the original copyright holder for the performance rights.

An intellectual property worker will take copyright protection on everything he can get.

YouTube is the hippest network, and they abuse copyright right and left.

One could work on a lot of albums such as 'Thiruvasagam in Symphony,' but with issues such as illegal downloading from the Internet and piracy, it is difficult.

Unfortunately, nothing is ever that simple in copyright law, and when it comes to music copyright, it's especially convoluted.

The battle over Napster has divided musicians and industry officials.

It is impossible to effectively monitor the huge volume of videos that are out there. It is often difficult to find out who owns the copyright on individual videos. Differing copyright laws in different countries also make the whole process harder.

We filed suit against YouTube before the Google purchase. At the time I went after YouTube, I thought it was a small company ripping off our copyrights.

I believe in copyright, but I don't believe in copyright extremism.

A free culture has been our past, but it will only be our future if we change the path we are on right now.

I oppose piracy and want to see intellectual property protected because that is what fosters and rewards innovation. But SOPA won't accomplish a meaningful reduction in piracy and causes massive collateral damage to the Internet ecosystem.

The marketplace can handle this. The laws are there. The courts have shown a consistent ability to find a balance between copyright owners and copyright users.

Online piracy needs to be dealt with itself, because people are just wholesale stealing people's work and not paying for it. It's very hard to figure out a way to fix it.

A free culture is not a culture without property; it is not a culture in which artists don't get paid.

In making policy designed with copyright in mind, you end up making decisions about whether other important technologies, such as privacy-enhancing or file-search technologies, should be encouraged or discouraged. A collision is happening between creativity and protecting IP.

I have always found it interesting... that there are people who regard copyright infringement as a form of flattery.

We are forced by the major publishers to include electronic rights in the contracts we make with publishers for new books. And there's very little we can do about that.

I'm a bit cynical that it ever will be addressed properly. I think it is healthy to get some sort of copyright protection. But some of it has gone on forever.

If the search engines don't respect the creators, there won't be anything to search in the future because creators have to make a living too.

I challenge record companies to show me evidence of a single penny they've lost due to Napster.

The Audio Home Recording Act directly says that noncommercial copying by consumers is lawful.