Judge Orders Google To Turn Over All YouTube User Data To Viacom - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Cynthetiq · 07-03-2008, 12:58 PM

Quote:

View: Judge Orders Google to Turn Over YouTube Records
Source: NY Times
posted with the TFP thread generator

Judge Orders Google to Turn Over YouTube Records
July 4, 2008
Judge Orders Google to Turn Over YouTube Records
By MIGUEL HELFT

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in New York has ordered Google to turn over to Viacom a database linking users of YouTube, the Web’s largest video site by far, with every clip they have watched there.

The order raised concerns among users and privacy advocates that the online video viewing habits of hundreds of millions of people could be exposed. But Google and Viacom said they were hoping to come up with a way to protect the anonymity of YouTube viewers.

Viacom said that the information would be safeguarded by a protective order restricting access to the data to outside advisers, who will use it solely to press Viacom’s $1 billion copyright suit against Google.

Still, the judge’s order, which was made public late Wednesday, renewed concerns among privacy advocates that Internet companies like Google are collecting unprecedented amounts of private information that could be misused or could unexpectedly fall into the hands of third parties.

For every video on YouTube, the judge required Google to turn over to Viacom the login name of every user who watched it, and the address of their computer, known as an I.P., or Internet protocol, address. Both companies have argued that such data cannot be used to unmask the identities of individual users with certainty. But in many cases, technology experts and others have been able to link I.P. addresses to individuals using records of their online activities.

Google and Viacom said they had had discussions about ways to ensure the data is further protected to assure anonymity.

“We are disappointed the court granted Viacom’s overreaching demand for viewing history,” Catherine Lacavera, Google’s senior litigation counsel, said in a statement. “We are asking Viacom to respect users’ privacy and allow us to anonymize the logs before producing them under the court’s order.”

Michael Fricklas, Viacom’s general counsel said: “We are investigating techniques, including anonymization, to enhance the security of information that will be produced.”

Mr. Fricklas added that Viacom would not have direct access to the information Google produces, and that its use would be strictly limited. Viacom would not, for example, be able to chase down users who illegally posted clips from “The Colbert Report” on YouTube.

“The information that is produced by Google is going to be limited to outside advisers who can use it solely for the purpose of enforcing our rights against YouTube and Google,” Mr. Fricklas said. “I can unequivocally state that we will not use any of this information to enforce rights against end users.”

In a letter sent Thursday, Google’s lawyers asked their counterparts at Viacom to agree to allow Google to remove information from the data that could potentially be used to identify individuals.

“We request that plaintiffs agree that YouTube may redact usernames and I.P. addresses from the viewing data in the interests of protecting user privacy,” wrote David H. Kramer, a partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. Viacom did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the letter.

Privacy advocates said they welcomed Viacom’s commitment to using the information only for the purposes of the litigation, but they remained concerned about protecting user rights.

“Users should have the right to challenge and contest the production of this deeply private information,” said Kurt Opsahl, senior staff lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “Such right is protected by law.”

Mr. Opsahl said that even records that did not include a user’s login name and I.P. address might be able to be associated with specific individuals. He said he believed the judge’s order violated the federal Video Privacy Protection Act.

Congress passed the law to protect the video rental records of individuals, after a newspaper disclosed the rental records of Robert H. Bork, then a Supreme Court nominee.

United States District Court Judge Louis L. Stanton, who is presiding over Viacom’s lawsuit against Google and YouTube, said that Google could “cite no authority barring them from disclosing such information in civil discovery proceedings, and their privacy concerns are speculative.” He said the information could help Viacom make its case.

“A markedly higher proportion of infringing-video watching may bear on plaintiff’s vicarious liability claim, and defendants’ substantial noninfringing use defense,” he wrote.

Does this mean that we'll (TFP) turn up in some of the data since each video you click through here picks up the place of referral? Personally, I don't really care so much about this, when I think about how absurd it is to be worried about this, it's mind boggling.

Remember, the US Constitution gives you the right to privacy from the government, NOT any right to privacy from each other or corporate entities.

Zweiblumen · 07-03-2008, 01:13 PM

can you say TOR ?

Willravel · 07-03-2008, 01:40 PM

I believe Google plans to appeal, which will at least postpone the transfer of information.

Not to give away too much, but anonymization is probably a lot closer than they're leading on. It's a shame that they'll have to do that instead of have the law protect their customers and users.

I myself have used soundtracks that I've legally purchased as background music for several original videos I've posted on YouTube. Will I be a victim of this?

Edit:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...tube-data.html

Strange Famous · 07-05-2008, 08:09 AM

The information stored does not relate just to US citizens, I dont see how a US court has the right to decide if my privacy can be invaded in this way.

jewels · 07-05-2008, 11:09 AM

WTF? Overreaching for sure.

Viacom gets the right to have my info on file ... just in case? :scratchhead:

Sounds like their rights supercede mine.

Baraka_Guru · 07-05-2008, 11:36 AM

Oh, crap. Does this mean Viacom will have a record of my "goes wrong" searches on YouTube?

xepherys · 07-05-2008, 02:35 PM

My first question is, who cares who has WATCHED these videos? It is not unlawful to watch copyrighted material shown in an unlawful way. It is only unlawful to be the shower, not the viewer. I don't get it...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

Does this mean that we'll (TFP) turn up in some of the data since each video you click through here picks up the place of referral? Personally, I don't really care so much about this, when I think about how absurd it is to be worried about this, it's mind boggling.

Remember, the US Constitution gives you the right to privacy from the government, NOT any right to privacy from each other or corporate entities.

I don't believe so. Usually data collected like this is client data, not referrer data. TFP would be the referrer in this case. *shrug*

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel

I myself have used soundtracks that I've legally purchased as background music for several original videos I've posted on YouTube. Will I be a victim of this?

I don't know that Viacom cares about music, but the RIAA might like to have a word with you. In all honesty, though, you cannot use one artists work in your own work (regardless of profitability) without permission. Buying the music only offers you rights to listen to the music.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous

The information stored does not relate just to US citizens, I dont see how a US court has the right to decide if my privacy can be invaded in this way.

That falls back on your government. Without access to your ISP or your government ordering your ISP to release private data from their IP tables, all they'd have is a number. That does them no good.

The Faba · 07-06-2008, 12:02 AM

Viacom is based in America, so their products and copyrights fall under American jurisdiction. Also, Google is based in America, making them more susceptible to American law.

As for the rights to violate privacy... there are many ways to interpret this. I'm only going to list two, which are that Youtube has a 'terms of use' (I've never read it, but I'm sure it has some clause in it) and that it is technically an anonymous site where you don't give them your name (or are not forced to)

Purple Monkey Dishwasher

Martian · 07-06-2008, 01:15 AM

Necessary instructions for circumventing this are cleverly hidden in the following song:

07-03-2008, 01:13 PM	#2 (permalink)
Zweiblumen Insane Location: at home	can you say TOR ? __________________ Sodomy non sapiens. : I'm buggered if I know

07-03-2008, 01:40 PM	#3 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	I believe Google plans to appeal, which will at least postpone the transfer of information. Not to give away too much, but anonymization is probably a lot closer than they're leading on. It's a shame that they'll have to do that instead of have the law protect their customers and users. I myself have used soundtracks that I've legally purchased as background music for several original videos I've posted on YouTube. Will I be a victim of this? Edit: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...tube-data.html Last edited by Willravel; 07-03-2008 at 04:27 PM..

07-05-2008, 08:09 AM	#4 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	The information stored does not relate just to US citizens, I dont see how a US court has the right to decide if my privacy can be invaded in this way. __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

07-05-2008, 11:09 AM	#5 (permalink)
jewels Eponymous Location: Central Central Florida	WTF? Overreaching for sure. Viacom gets the right to have my info on file ... just in case? :scratchhead: Sounds like their rights supercede mine. __________________ We are always more anxious to be distinguished for a talent which we do not possess, than to be praised for the fifteen which we do possess. Mark Twain

07-05-2008, 11:36 AM	#6 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	Oh, crap. Does this mean Viacom will have a record of my "goes wrong" searches on YouTube? __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

07-06-2008, 12:02 AM	#8 (permalink)
The Faba Crazy	Viacom is based in America, so their products and copyrights fall under American jurisdiction. Also, Google is based in America, making them more susceptible to American law. As for the rights to violate privacy... there are many ways to interpret this. I'm only going to list two, which are that Youtube has a 'terms of use' (I've never read it, but I'm sure it has some clause in it) and that it is technically an anonymous site where you don't give them your name (or are not forced to) Purple Monkey Dishwasher

07-06-2008, 01:15 AM	#9 (permalink)
Martian Young Crumudgeon Location: Canada	Necessary instructions for circumventing this are cleverly hidden in the following song: __________________ I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said - Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame