U.S. District Judge Louis L. Stanton authorized full access to the YouTube logs after Viacom Inc. and other copyright holders argued that they needed the data to show whether their copyright-protected videos are more heavily watched than amateur clips.
The data would not be publicly released but disclosed only to the plaintiffs, and it would include less specific identifiers than a user's real name or e-mail address.
I find it hard to believe that Viacom will allow You Tube subscribers to get away with posting copy written materials on You Tube without seeking to prosecute them. You can bet a worthless Federal Reserve note on that.
Lawyers for Google Inc., which owns YouTube, said producing 12 terabytes of data -- equivalent to the text of roughly 12 million books -- would be expensive, time-consuming and a threat to users' privacy.
The database includes information on when each video gets played, which can be used to determine how often a clip is viewed. Attached to each entry is each viewer's unique login ID and the Internet Protocol, or IP, address for that viewer's computer.
Stanton ruled this week that the plaintiffs had a legitimate need for the information and that the privacy concerns are speculative.
Stanton rejected a request from the plaintiffs for Google to disclose the source code -- the technical secret sauce -- powering its market-leading search engine, saying there's no evidence Google manipulated its search algorithms to treat copyright-infringing videos differently.
The court has yet to rule on Google's requests to question comedians Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert of Viacom's Comedy Central.
Viacom is seeking at least $1 billion in damages from Google, saying YouTube has built a business by using the Internet to "willfully infringe" copyrights on Viacom shows, which include Comedy Central's "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" and Nickelodeon's "SpongeBob SquarePants" cartoon.
The lawsuit was combined with a similar case filed by a British soccer league and other parties.
Together, the plaintiffs are trying to prove that YouTube has known of copyright infringement and can do more to stop it, a finding that could dissolve the immunity protections that service providers have when they merely host content submitted by their users.
Though Google said giving the plaintiffs access to YouTube viewer data would threaten users' privacy, Stanton referred to Google's own blog entry in which the company argued that the IP address alone cannot identify a specific individual.
In a statement, Google said it was "disappointed the court granted Viacom's overreaching demand for viewing history. We are asking Viacom to respect users' privacy and allow us to anonymize the logs before producing them under the court's order."
Google did not say whether it would appeal the ruling or seek to narrow it.
Stanton's ruling made only passing reference to a 1988 federal law barring the disclosure of specific video materials that subscribers request or obtain.
Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said Stanton should have considered that law along with constitutional free-speech rights, including a right to read or view materials anonymously.
He said a user's ID can sometimes include identifying information such as a first initial and last name.
Viacom said it isn't seeking any user's identity. The company said any data provided "will be used exclusively for the purpose of proving our case against YouTube and Google (and) will be handled subject to a court protective order and in a highly confidential manner."
Sure we believe you,
This is not the first time Google has fought the disclosure of user information it had been stockpiling. While gathering evidence for a case involving online pornography, the U.S. Justice Department subpoenaed Google and other search engines for lists of search requests made by their users.
After Google resisted, a federal judge ruled that Google was obliged to turn over only a sample of Web addresses in its search index, not the actual search terms requested.
| Member Comments |
First, all avatars drawn by yours truly, I will do my best to keep them current. (Thanks Channel 2 for the page, still fair and unbiased on the web...lol Ron Paul 2008) I really hate to be the one to shake the foundations of the sheepoles trust in a system that could care less about any of us. But hey, some ones has to do it. I love to hear the comments from those that come across my page, but if you think you have facts to support your view then by all means bring it to my attention. But if you disagree and have no substance or facts to back your view then don't waste my time or your own. If you have no support written or video regardless of the source I will delete your comment. So to all the cats that just don't like what I have to say, or the views I bring up. Tough, because I will use my first amendment right while we still can. It's time for us as a nation to take back our country from the Military industrial complex, Look around. When the Military can take over a middle school in our very own state, (Wyoming Michigan) and wave guns in the faces of our children in the name of an anti-terrorist drill with no authority from the parents or the students, or taser you for drinking a beer on the street in front of your house while talking to your neighbor,It won't be long before they come into your home take your guns and ship you off to one of the many "Slave" Camps that FEMA has set up across this country. You can investigate what I say for yourself or you can be led to the slaughter like the sheep they hope you are.
Member Since: 9/30/2007