What (new information) did you actually learn from that PR piece?!

The continued existence of ifilm kills viacom's credibility here, imo.

finite, I had zero information before because I just wasn't interested. But Viacom's arguments were convincing where Google's arguments, as presented in the article, were shaky at best.

Furthermore, Google had the technology and resources to filter copyright content but didn't. Instead, Google chose to hide behind self-serving interpretation of DMCA. If Viacom has evidence that Google offered to filter in return for licensing deals, that won't look good at all either. Lastly, they put other websites at risk by so visibly abusing DMCA. If Viacom wins, what will happen to all the websites with "Upload Image" button?

My question is: if Viacom wins, what will happen to _all_ the illegal websites that have an advertisement ring backing them?

Will Viacom be able to make the case against u.s. advertisement companies selling advertisements through non-u.s. based services?

Davide, given that spam advertisers are not even suffering public backlash, I don't think advertisers are at risk here either.