Hi Paul,

The company statement is below. For what it's worth, I'd be very appreciative if you used the entire statement:

"Current Media today announced changes to its structure and staffing. Approximately 60 positions have been eliminated in the company’s three U.S. offices and approximately 30 new positions created. Many of those whose positions were eliminated have been placed in the new positions. Current will have approximately 410 employees (after these staffing adjustments). These changes result from the development of a new, innovative programming strategy built around eight cross-platform channels, including news, comedy, music and technology, slated to premiere in the first quarter of 2009. Current’s new programming strategy expands upon its pioneering use of viewer created content to include additional opportunities for participation, creating a far more viewer-influenced network, and further unifies the Company’s online and TV platforms by having each web channel paired with a companion TV show. In addition, these changes enable Current Media to reduce its cost structure, thereby assuring that it will be comfortably profitable in 2009 regardless the depth and length of the recession."

YouTube was a breeze. Though they insist you should "not upload any TV shows, music videos, music concerts, or commercials without permission unless they consist entirely of content you created yourself," they also explain the "fair use" exception to this rule, in detail. They do, however, leave budding filmmakers with this warning, "if the copyright owner disagrees with your interpretation of fair use, the copyright owner may choose to resolve the dispute in court". YouTube knows a thing or two about being dragged into court. But being a sport, they allowed my upload to go live.

Current.com was also a big fan of existing legal doctrine. They let me post both the video itself and a link to the YouTube video. Both show up in the first page of results when you search for "Indiana Jones". I have to remember to send Al Gore a "thank you" note.

MSN Video was not quite as kind. MSN Video would not publish the film (which includes 80 seconds of the "Indiana Jones" theme song). My guess is that they matched the audio track to a library of copyrighted material, since just five days prior someone had no problem adding "Watch Indiana Jones 4 Movie" to the site (a silent film that displays a link to a Myvix rip of the film). And there's the rub.

When automated filtering systems are created in response to the threat of copyright lawsuits the result is that good, honest people get trampled underfoot while the actual pirates simply work around the barrier. You can still find an Indiana Jones rip using MSN Video, but you cannot find my brilliant treatise on tempo as it relates to the work of John Williams. Blame Yoko Ono: Most upload sites do not have the resources to change filtering technology each time a new copyright ruling comes out. Once a draconian filtering system is put in place to please copyright owners, it will take more than imagination to get creators' "fair use" rights back.