Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Google must divulge YouTube log
BBC ^ | 7/3/08

Posted on 07/03/2008 8:27:18 AM PDT by LibWhacker

Google must divulge the viewing habits of every user who has ever watched any video on YouTube, a US court has ruled.

The ruling comes as part of Google's legal battle with Viacom over allegations of copyright infringement.

Digital rights group the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) called the ruling a "set-back to privacy rights".

The viewing log, which will be handed to Viacom, contains the log-in ID of users, the computer IP address (online identifier) and video clip details.

While the legal battle between the two firms is being contested in the US, it is thought the ruling will apply to YouTube users and their viewing habits everywhere.

Viacom, which owns MTV and Paramount Pictures, has alleged that YouTube is guilty of massive copyright infringement.

Legal action

When it initiated legal action in March 2007 the firm said it had identified about 160,000 unauthorised clips of its programmes on the website, which had been viewed more than 1.5 billion times.

Following the launch of its billion-dollar lawsuit, YouTube introduced filtering tools in an effort to prevent copyright materials from appearing on the site.

The US court declined Viacom's request that Google be forced to hand over the source code of YouTube, saying it was a "trade secret" that should not be disclosed.

But it said privacy concerns expressed by Google about handing over the log were "speculative".

The ruling will see the viewing habits of millions of YouTube users given to Viacom, totalling more than 12 terabytes of data.

Viacom said it wanted the data to "compare the attractiveness of allegedly infringing video with that of non-infringing videos."

'Erroneous ruling'

The EFF said: "The Court's erroneous ruling is a set-back to privacy rights, and will allow Viacom to see what you are watching on YouTube.

"We urge Viacom to back off this overbroad request and Google to take all steps necessary to challenge this order and protect the rights of its users."

The body said the ruling was also potentially unlawful because the log data did contain personally identifiable data.

The court also ruled that Google disclose to Viacom the details of all videos that have been removed from the site for any reason.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: copyright; court; divulge; google; googlecorrupt; log; order; ruling; viacom; youtube
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
The 'rats dream of getting a court order like this against FreeRepublic someday.
1 posted on 07/03/2008 8:27:19 AM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

What about YouTube deleting pro-life videos at the behest of abortionists?


2 posted on 07/03/2008 8:29:51 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

This is so f**king ridiculous.

Youtube is the ONLY source of a lot of the stuff that people watch!

I love when companies scream “copyright infringement” on something that YOU CAN NO LONGER BUY! Like old sitcoms and stuff.


3 posted on 07/03/2008 8:32:56 AM PDT by RockinRight (I just paid $63 for gas. An icefield in Alaska is NOT the Grand Canyon. F--- the caribou.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Yep. Expect that 3 AM knock in the not-distant-enough future.


4 posted on 07/03/2008 8:32:58 AM PDT by null and void (every Muslim, the minute he can differentiate, carries hate of Americans, Jews & Christians - OBL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

By users, do they mean gmail user ID, or actually any anonymous user by IP address? If so, this information could be also be used by other inquirers to track those who have viewed political videos as well, or left comments at sites, viewed “rumors” in the news, etc. etc...

They’re already doing this for China, evidently.

got tinfoil?


5 posted on 07/03/2008 8:34:24 AM PDT by dandelion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Our Founders would not recognize America as is exists today. The Bill of Rights is invalidated if a “US Court” says so.


6 posted on 07/03/2008 8:36:52 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813

Viacom owns CBS and is deeply connected to the Clintons via the money chain...


7 posted on 07/03/2008 8:45:39 AM PDT by princess leah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Big Brother is watching us.


8 posted on 07/03/2008 8:46:50 AM PDT by DemonDeac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
The 'rats dream of getting a court order like this against FreeRepublic someday.

First they came for the....

9 posted on 07/03/2008 8:52:08 AM PDT by Samwise ("Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dandelion
...must divulge the viewing habits of every user who has ever watched any video on YouTube

When it happens to FreeRepublic, they'll want to know the ip address of every user who has ever clicked on a FreeRepublic link, how long he or she viewed it before clicking on another FR link, and (if he was a registered user) every comment he ever made on FR (including all the FreepMail he exchanged with other Freepers).

This will be a very, very bad precedent if it stands (I just wish I knew what those odds were).

10 posted on 07/03/2008 8:55:02 AM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: montag813
What about YouTube deleting pro-life videos at the behest of abortionists?

What does that have to do with this story?

11 posted on 07/03/2008 8:56:48 AM PDT by Fundamentally Fair (If given a choice between a POW and a POS, I'll take the POW.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

You Tube is so 2007, it is old hat.


12 posted on 07/03/2008 8:56:57 AM PDT by Mark was here (The earth is bipolar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void
Yep. Expect that 3 AM knock in the not-distant-enough future.

That 3 AM visitor better be prepared to eat lead.
13 posted on 07/03/2008 8:56:57 AM PDT by mkjessup (Jimmy Carter is the Skidmark in the panties of American history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

This was a stupid decision. I wonder if the judge in that case will now try to get my IP and address from this post...


14 posted on 07/03/2008 8:57:34 AM PDT by seacapn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
This will be a very, very bad precedent if it stands (I just wish I knew what those odds were).

How does "even money" grab you?

15 posted on 07/03/2008 8:58:14 AM PDT by Old Sarge (CTHULHU '08 - I won't settle for a lesser evil any longer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
No doubt the Rats dream of a lot of things but the court in this case forgot to notify me that I had a right to appear on my own behalf before an order was issued depriving me of life, liberty or property.

This judge must be taken down, tarred, feathered, and ridden out of town on a rail ~ and as quickly as possible as that can be arranged.

I think I will file an appeal ~

16 posted on 07/03/2008 8:59:11 AM PDT by muawiyah (We need a "Gastank For America" to win back Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge

Kinda low. :-(


17 posted on 07/03/2008 8:59:29 AM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Another violation of the 4th Amendment (RIP).

The Jihad on Drugs takes another scalp.


18 posted on 07/03/2008 9:01:57 AM PDT by Natchez Hawk (Truth: The anti-drug war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void

I dont really go to youtube much, but I do catch things occasionally from within sites that have embedded things.

I have an account there, why I don’t know, but they can kiss my ass... raiding a home over some kind of watching of a video that MIGHT be “copyright infringement” will get people killed, very quickly.


19 posted on 07/03/2008 9:09:40 AM PDT by Rick.Donaldson (http://www.transasianaxis.com - Please visit for latest on DPRK/Russia/China/et al.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

Roger that.

What I’m confused about here is that the viewer does not download the file, like they would an MPG via file sharing. I know there’s third party aps. that allow it, but as a rule, the clips are streamed. There’s no transfer of data. So, any “infringement” rests on the original uploader, and YouTube, not the file viewer.

So why would they want a “viewer log”.


20 posted on 07/03/2008 9:11:03 AM PDT by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson