Lawrence Lessig writes that the Viacom-YouTube suit is the result of judicial interference in a matter of law that Congress had already decided link here. It injected the courts into what everyone thought was settled law the safe-harbor provision of the DMCA through the use of take-down requests when it entered the Grokster case twenty months ago. That decision expanded liability under the Copyright Act to cover wrongfully providing technology that induces copyright infringement. The similarity of the Viacom-YouTube case seems pretty clear. Lessig expects the case to be long and expensive for the public. The alternative is a move by the Congress to reassert its authority over copyright as laid out in the Constitution.