"It seems… our YouTube might really end up like Napster and be shut down."
The moment the phrase "isolated and helpless" came up, YouTube co-founder Steve Chen's eyes dimmed.
He sighed a little dejectedly and said, "I even feel like it's not just Fox, MGM, NBC Universal, Sony, Viacom, Time Warner, Disney, DreamWorks, Lionsgate, and other content companies targeting us right now."
"Microsoft, Apple, Amazon—these companies might also file lawsuits against us next week."
"So…"
"Do we just shut it down?"
"Just close YouTube?"
"Stop struggling?"
"Stop wasting money?"
Although his tone was low and he was even speaking in a tentative, suggestive way, the moment his words came out, the other five people present—Isabella's entire family, along with YouTube's other two co-founders Chad Hurleyand Jawed Karim—were amused.
Because the way he described it was a bit funny.
The feeling his words gave was like someone bathing in a scenic natural river, humming while scrubbing their back, while countless unseen eyes were watching him, ready to open their jaws and swallow him whole.
Of course, even if his words carried some humor, everyone only chuckled briefly before falling silent again.
Not just because the current situation wasn't suitable for laughter—
But also because, in their eyes, what he said wasn't wrong. When Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon chose to embrace the future by purchasing internet digital content rights from North American content providers under existing rules, and YouTube was filled with pirated content—
That, in itself, was infringing on their interests.
North American content providers were suing YouTube because they lived off copyright fees.
Their jumping in first didn't mean Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon didn't also have the right to sue.
So in reality, what YouTube had to face right now… was the entire world.
What YouTube had to withstand wasn't the punch of a $500 billion opponent, but the slap of trillion-dollar giants.
And as for that—
"Even though things are serious, shutting down YouTube directly… I believe none of us can accept that."
"So—let's think about how to respond?" Isabella clapped her hands with a smile. "I believe there is always a way out—"
Yes.
Even though Rupert Murdoch had struck ruthlessly from the start, using a divide-and-conquer strategy to turn all of Isabella's past support into forces that now had no choice but to oppose her, she had no intention of surrendering.
Because she wasn't French—waving a white flag wasn't in her dictionary.
Because her relationship with Rupert Murdoch was one of irreconcilable hostility—even if she surrendered, that old fox wouldn't let her go.
Since this battle had to be fought no matter what, whining was useless.
Of course, Isabella also had confidence in winning.
And the source of that confidence—
Was that in her previous life, YouTube had been sued many times over copyright issues, yet it had never been shut down.
That was a crucial piece of information.
YouTube's backing might be strong.
Google's backing might reach the heavens.
But did content capital have no influence on Capitol Hill?
Right?
When YouTube's enemies were never weak, yet it continued to survive, that could only mean one thing:
YouTube only looked illegal.
Yes, it hosted large amounts of pirated videos—but allowing users to upload pirated content wasn't itself illegal. If it were, YouTube wouldn't exist at all.
Since U.S. law contained loopholes that allowed YouTube to argue its way out, Isabella believed she had the advantage—
Damn it!
She couldn't say "the advantage is mine" again!
She had been in this world for six years, and only this year did she feel like she had the upper hand—
And what happened?
The situation flipped instantly.
That phrase was cursed!
After venting internally and seeing the disbelief on everyone's faces, she said, "So—Chad, Steven, Jawed… you don't have confidence in winning?"
"Uh… it's because we don't know how to win right now…" Chad Hurley spread his hands honestly.
"Really? I think you do." Isabella smiled.
"What?"
Her words surprised all three of them.
"Oh—Isa—I don't think I understand what you mean—"
Jawed Karim spoke frankly, "You're saying we should know how to win? Win the lawsuit?"
"Exactly." Isabella nodded with a smile.
"Why?" Steve Chen frowned, pushing up his glasses. "Why do you think that?"
"Because you're not ordinary people."
Isabella said with a grin, "Before founding YouTube, you'd already spent a long time in the internet field. So you must have studied copyright issues online, right?"
"Or rather, before founding YouTube, you must have already anticipated today's situation?"
"Right now, the reason you think this problem is unsolvable… is because the enemy is too strong?"
Her words surprised the three of them.
Because she was absolutely right.
When they were close enough to reach the core figures of the tech world, they had indeed already devised ways to evade liability before founding YouTube.
The reason those methods now seemed unusable was simple—
They were sophistry.
The logic was easy to understand.
Sophistry only works against equals or those beneath you.
If your opponent can crush you with sheer force, then no matter how eloquent you are, you're just a sharp-tongued baboon in front of them.
To put it more bluntly: fists beat philosophy. If reasoning fails, then physics takes over.
Still, since Isabella wanted to hear their ideas—
"Okay, Isa, since you want to know our previous approach, we'll tell you."
Chad Hurley pressed his lips together.
Maybe his mouth was dry.
He picked up a glass of water and took a gulp.
Or maybe he was organizing his thoughts.
After setting the glass down, he didn't speak immediately, instead pondering for a moment.
After a while, he finally said:
"Our idea comes from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act."
"There's a 'safe harbor' provision in the DMCA that says ISPs—Internet Service Providers—can create platforms where anyone can freely express themselves. If infringing content appears on the platform, once the copyright holder notifies them, the ISP must promptly remove or block the content."
"If the ISP responds in a timely manner, they can be exempted from liability for user infringement."
Isabella knew about the DMCA.
Most internet companies in the world had grown through its exemption clauses.
Or rather—
All primitive accumulation in this world could be summed up in one word: take.
Yahoo's directory was scraped.
Google's database was scraped.
Some companies let users upload documents, then scraped those documents themselves.
Even in the AI era, nothing had changed.
Why were AI phones being resisted?
Because they scraped app data, making capital lose control over users.
Kindness doesn't make money.
Since the DMCA was basically a magic immunity shield—
"Then what's the problem we're facing now?"
Vivian asked curiously, "Can't we use the DMCA's safe harbor provision?"
"Uh…"
Chad paused, seemingly not fully understanding the question.
But Jawed Karim quickly picked it up:
"It's like this, Mrs. Haywood—the safe harbor provision has triggering conditions. There's a 'notice and takedown' process."
"In simple terms, when a copyright holder finds infringing content on a site, they must first send a legally compliant notice. Then the site must promptly remove the content or disable access. Only then does the safe harbor apply."
"Additionally, the site must not have prior knowledge of the infringement and must not control or directly profit from the infringing content to qualify for exemption."
"So—you're saying Fox's lawsuit doesn't follow the process?" Catherine asked. "Their actions invalidated the safe harbor?"
In her memory, Fox, MGM, and NBC Universal had suddenly sued YouTube.
Before that, they hadn't sent any notice asking YouTube to remove infringing content.
And about that—
"No, Miss Catherine, their actions are legal," Steve Chen explained.
"What Jawed described is the standard process."
"The DMCA also allows a special process—if the copyright holder believes the ISP knew about the infringement, or even led it or profited from it, they can skip the notice-and-takedown step and file a lawsuit directly. That's the path Fox is taking."
"But do you actually know about specific users' infringement?" Catherine frowned. "And you didn't lead or profit from it, right?"
"That's exactly what we'll be arguing in court."
Chad sighed and took over again.
"Since our interests are aligned, I'll speak plainly. We did benefit from gray areas during our growth—but that's something every startup does."
"So we won't dwell on that."
"And while we don't know about every user's infringement, when the first video to surpass a million views on our platform is infringing content, and we don't remove it in time, content owners can assume we're actively facilitating piracy."
"Once that assumption exists, they can claim we're leading the infringement."
"And then we'll end up like Napster—forced to shut down."
"Of course, that 'assumption' can be argued against."
"But…"
"That kind of argument depends on who's making it."
"Because the argument is based on freedom of speech."
"If the plaintiff is too powerful and can influence everything outside the courtroom, then that argument won't convince judges or juries."
"… "
Isabella finally pieced together the full picture.
YouTube's predicament was this:
Even though the DMCA didn't require internet companies to proactively protect intellectual property, when infringement was obvious at a glance, they still had to deal with it.
For example, what if the first video on YouTube to surpass one million views was a Nike ad?
After discovering this, regardless of whether YouTube was acting to protect intellectual property or its own interests, it should have sent a letter to Nike asking whether the video was infringing.
If Nike said it wasn't infringement, okay, problem solved.
If Nike said it was, then YouTube would have to help remove it.
Of course, if Nike said that although it was infringement, it actually provided positive promotion for their company and they allowed the video to remain, then that would be the best possible outcome for YouTube.
But the problem was, YouTube had been heading straight toward infringement from the very beginning.
They practically wanted to use all the world's resources for free.
So up until now, they hadn't sent a single inquiry letter to any copyright holder.
Cough.
There were actual rich kids in YouTube's founding team.
And this is how rich kids do things.
As a result, since YouTube had never protected others' interests, every victim could claim that YouTube was actively spreading pirated content, that it was deliberately providing fertile ground for piracy.
With that, YouTube could never put on the DMCA's "magic immunity cloak."
That said, they weren't too worried about this at first.
Because the U.S. values "freedom of speech."
Because "freedom of speech" is written into the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
So his original thinking was: if they got sued, even if his father-in-law didn't help, he could still use the argument of "freedom of speech" to explain why YouTube didn't notify copyright holders after discovering potentially infringing videos—
They're just a company!
They only created a platform for people to express themselves freely!
What right do they have to monitor users?
Right?
If they had the authority to monitor users, wouldn't that be equivalent to having investigative power like the judiciary?
Wouldn't that violate others' legal rights?
Right?
Uh…
This is basically sophistry.
And whether sophistry works in court has very little to do with whether you're actually right.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act was enacted in 1998. It had been nine years.
In those nine years, countless companies believed the "safe harbor" provision was unbeatable.
But when those companies trusted the law and went all in—
Ninety-nine percent of them died because of infringement.
For example, Napster.
Those who survived—
Were all true insiders.
Yeah.
The "safe harbor" provision actually has a nickname: the "second-generation clause."
You think people who can even sell nuclear tech would leave legal loopholes for ordinary folks?
Don't joke.
That loophole was reserved for their own people.
Since Chad Hurley wasn't truly part of that inner circle—his father-in-law didn't like him—
That's why he chose to rely on the seemingly powerful Isabella. In his plan, as long as Isabella could block lawsuits from Time Warner, Disney, DreamWorks, Viacom, and Sony, the remaining companies wouldn't pose much of a threat.
But no one expected—no one expected—
That when Rupert Murdoch attacked, he opened with a killing curse.
Once he used "righteousness" to pull Time Warner, Disney, and others into his camp—
Sophistry?
Did it still matter?
"Oh—I feel like this is such a headache…"
Isabella's meeting with the YouTube founders lasted a full two hours.
After sorting everything out, she got up, said goodbye, and returned to the hotel to think.
But the moment she walked in, Catherine threw herself onto the sofa.
Her head was buzzing.
"Isa, I think this company… YouTube… can't be saved."
She said it bluntly. "If it really comes down to it… just give up, like Steve Chen said…"
"Because you have a lot of work this year."
"You can't let YouTube affect your path forward."
In Catherine's eyes, YouTube was already beyond saving.
Even though yesterday, Barry Meyer, Robert Iger, Steven Spielberg, and others had all called Isabella, saying they were still allies, saying they would continue to support her even if they were being pressured by Rupert Murdoch—
Everyone knew that support was limited.
Because this year alone, they had a long list of collaborative projects to release.
Sony had The Da Vinci Code.
Disney had The Voice, Hannah Montana, Nashville, plus a park opening.
Time Warner had The Devil Wears Prada and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (Part 2).
When collaborations were this continuous—
If they were also in lawsuits against each other, how would they promote these works?
They couldn't.
How would they even release them?
They couldn't.
So at that point, quickly ending the lawsuit and minimizing the damage became everyone's real goal.
And once someone wanted to resolve things quickly, someone else would have to make sacrifices.
And when the scale had YouTube on one side, and Fox, MGM, NBC Universal, Sony, Viacom, Time Warner, Disney, and DreamWorks on the other—
Anyone with a functioning brain knew which side would be sacrificed.
Yes.
Right now, Barry Meyer and the others were supporting Isabella.
But how long could that support last?
One month?
Two months?
Definitely not more than three.
Because after three months, it would be June.
The summer blockbuster season.
And under normal circumstances, a copyright lawsuit couldn't be resolved in two months.
So—
Better to give up early than late.
Giving up early would at least make others feel indebted to you.
Especially Barry Meyer.
He was the one who discovered YouTube first.
But—
"Isa, I think Catherine is right."
Vivian agreed. "Your investment in YouTube isn't that large."
"So giving up won't cause major losses."
"And…"
"A prolonged copyright lawsuit isn't good for us either."
"Because our main source of income is also copyright."
"We can't give people the impression that we tolerate piracy."
"At least, that's what I think."
…
Isabella admitted her mother and sister made sense.
But—
"Mom, Catherine, I actually want to fight this lawsuit."
After taking off her sun jacket, she smiled. "I want to go to court against Fox and the others."
"What?"
Catherine thought she misheard.
"Why?"
She couldn't understand why her sister wanted to waste time on a guaranteed loss.
"Because I think I can win."
Isabella leaned back on the sofa, stretching lazily. "I think I can win this lawsuit."
"Or rather, as long as I appear in court once, YouTube can win."
"???"
Vivian and Catherine were stunned.
They exchanged glances.
For a moment, both thought Isabella had lost her mind.
Seeing their reaction, Isabella dropped the suspense.
"Alright—I know what you're thinking. You think I've gone crazy?"
"I'm serious."
"Because Chad said it—whether something is infringement in the internet world often comes down to sophistry."
"Facts aren't what matter. What matters is persuading the judge and jury."
"So—"
"Isn't that my home turf?"
"How many people in the U.S. haven't read Harry Potter to their kids, or watched the movies with them, or seen The Voice, or listened to my songs, or used my memes?"
"According to U.S. law's recusal principle—"
"If I show up in court, can a jury even be formed?"
At that, Isabella stopped.
Smiling as she looked at her mother and sister.
Their faces were blank with shock.
Her smile widened.
"Even if I don't fully understand the law, I know this—if I appear in court, the trial itself becomes hard to proceed."
"And personally, I think that's the best outcome."
"For Fox and the others, too."
"Because if the trial can't proceed, they'll have no choice but to withdraw or settle."
"Then everyone has to sit down and talk about copyright."
"But if the trial actually starts—"
"Chad Hurley said the only argument he could think of was sophistry?"
"But I think if I appear, we won't need sophistry."
"Because I clearly remember—"
"At the North American premiere of Prisoner of Azkaban, I told the public that as long as people used my memes non-commercially, I wouldn't sue, and I reminded everyone not to infringe others' copyrights."
"That was in 2004, right?"
"YouTube didn't even exist yet."
"So if I was already advocating respect for copyright back in 2004, would I invest in a company promoting piracy in 2005?"
"And when I promoted that company, I always said it was about 'recording life, recording beauty.'"
"I think as long as I bring people's memories back to 2004, I'll have 350 million witnesses, won't I?"
Clap.
She clapped her hands.
Vivian and Catherine stared at her, stunned, mouths slightly open.
That's right.
After hearing the founders' logic, Isabella instantly felt the situation flip again.
Not just because she had celebrity advantage—if her fanbase was large enough, under the Western jury system, she was practically unbeatable.
When Michael Jordan clashed with NASCAR, trials had to be postponed because jurors were his fans.
Before Luigi even went to trial, the court delayed for three months because they couldn't find jurors who hadn't criticized health insurance.
More importantly, she was both a supporter of the internet sharing ecosystem and a practitioner of copyright protection.
When she had publicly urged people not to infringe online—
Who could still claim her investment in YouTube supported piracy?
YouTube was founded after Prisoner of Azkaban.
So—
Murdoch's move looked wild at first?
She thought so too.
But now—
Sorry.
If I just stand there, I'm basically immune to magic.