Viacom's really pushing it!!

[tg]

Looks like Viacom wants more control over all their properties.

From CNN:

NEW YORK (AP) -- Dismissing privacy concerns, a federal judge overseeing a $1 billion copyright-infringement lawsuit against YouTube has ordered the popular online video-sharing service to disclose who watches which video clips and when.

.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.

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."

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.

[Aanglover]

had a feeling this would come to be sooner or later...

[Chaobunny]

Ouch. So much for AMVs and my series...I hope they don't do a big sweep again, that would really stink >_<

[Escalus (Syn)]

Frankly, that why you don't get rid of your videos on your computer. Then just reload them. Simple as that. I highly doubt they would ban you.

[tg]

^ That reminded me of when Viacom did their first sweep, they banned my first YT account. Just for having one single Avatar music video among other videos that were not Viacom's properties.

At first, I was kind of in shock so I made an account on livevideo in response. But, it just didn't feel the same as Youtube becuase YT has an easier search function. Veoh wasn't in my favs either. Despite the higher video quality, its video interface sucked up a lot of my computer memory that I had to keep constantly emptying out my Temporary Internet Files. So, I went and remade my YT account. It surpassed what I had in my previous account. I regret deleting one of my vids awhile back pre-Viacom sweep since I had no idea Viacom was this angry.

So, yeah.. Agreeing with Synayran. Do not delete any of your vids in case of an emergency situation. ^_^ It's pretty easy to bounce back from the unnecessary ban. And yes, uploading after a "sweep" will save you from Viacom's clutches from targeting you as a victim.

[username]

Youtube is so popular though, any other video host is pretty much a step down.

Also I feel like mentioning how much Veoh's search engine sucks, because that thing irks me so much.

[Amira]

I agree with you on that, Kaneda. But I do like Veoh's library feature and better quality. Eh, I think we all knew this was coming at some point.

[Escalus (Syn)]

There are pros and cons to youtube. The people who post AMV and stuff but are those 9 minute music and blurry picture vids are not one of the pros.

[Blind Bandit]

Jul 3, 2008 23:29:37 GMT -5 Amira said:

I agree with you on that, Kaneda. But I do like Veoh's library feature and better quality. Eh, I think we all knew this was coming at some point.

that is one thing you tube has going for it. Its got a great search engine.

And I also have to agree. We all know how Viacom behaves. They don't understand online video providers like you tube /Veoh /Live Video. They don't understand that if anything they gain more viewers. In my opinion they missed a golden opportunity when they turned down the five hundred million dollars, google/youtube was prepared to pay and they may also have been up for ruther royalties. They could have gotten payed and had increased exposure. But as we all know Viacomnot internet savvy enough to understand that.

[fuego]

I love the faux pas answers for keeping up "your creations".

[Jalien]

Urgh. I remember uploading my first atla music vid just before the sweep. It was rather disappointing when it happened. I moved to livevideo but the search feature is Awful.
I can understand what's wrong w/ uploading whole episodes but I'll never see the problem of uploading amvs (using clips from dvds I bought for that matter!)
Viacom pisses me off.

[nandireya]

Yes...for me at least it makes them look petty and so I'm less likely to support their product...

[thecoinman]

Somebody should launch a counter lawsuit agains Viacom because for one i think forcing you tube to tell viacom about who watches the videos is AN EXTREME VIOLATION of our privacy and also as for fan made videos they should not be deleted becuase there is a law called the fair use law which states

“quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”

Fan made videos fall under this, so they should not be targeted.

[nandireya]

I don't have any grief with them about their ire at the posting of full episodes...even though it's the only way a lot of fans outside the US can see the episodes...but the AMVs and parodies are harmless...heck, the two guys who actually CREATED the show encourage them.

[thecoinman]

^which is why mike and bryan should step in and say something