It protects the right of copyright holders at the expense of the First Amendment.

Unfortunately, Google continues to distinguish itself by failing to join the majority of major digital companies that have affirmatively embraced the legal rights of copyright holders.

How does zero respect for the rights of copyright holders build trust between "partners"?

The 1998 law "balances the rights of copyright holders and the need to protect the Internet as an important new form of communication," Google said in its filing.

Bill C-61 attracted widespread criticism from critics who claim that it does not strike a fair balance between the rights of copyright holders and consumers.

Of course, Google disagreed, asserting that it respects the rights of copyright holders and that it will stand its ground against Viacom.

Does this strike a balance between protecting the rights of copyright holders and ISPs?

I know what the rights of copyright holders are.

This isn't about the rights of copyright holders, it's about political/coporate control of the web under the guise of protecting copyright.

"We are confident that YouTube has respected the legal rights of copyright holders and believe the courts will agree," says the statement.