discuss the issues that arise in this scenario as far as copyright and licensing goes. John Smith, a Berklee student, videotapes himself performing a cover version of Prince's "1999," as directed by a professor for a class assignment, but changes the word "1999" to "2029," and then uploads it using a Berklee internet connection to Youtube. (The professor did not ask him to post it.) He did not seek any type of license before posting the work. Warner Chappell, the copyright owner in the underlying musical composition "1999," sends a takedown notice to Youtube's copyright agent, and Youtube removes the infringing video within 24 hours of receipt of the takedown notice. Warner Chappell then sues Youtube for contributory copyright infringement and subpoenas Berklee under the DMCA (section 512h) to obtain the name associated with the IP address that uploaded the video. Please analyze this case and determine whether Berklee should be required to disclose John's identity to Warner Chappell under a DMCA subpoena, and if: (i) John or (ii) Youtube, could be held liable for copyright infringement in a case by Warner Chappell- and why or why not. Finally, whether or not you believe he is liable, hypothetically, if he were to be liable, please explain which remedies Warner Chappell could seek