Viacom Gets To Find Out What YouTube Videos You Watched

from the not-good dept

In the ongoing trainwreck that is Viacom's misguided lawsuit against YouTube (the one they would be better off losing) a judge has come out with a ruling on evidence that Google has to hand over to Viacom -- and it's being portrayed in the press as both a win and a loss for Google. On the "win" side, Google does not have to hand over the YouTube source code (or the source code of its filtering system). This makes sense, as the source code is rather meaningless here, and this request was clearly a reach from the start.

However, much more troublesome is the judge's ruling that Google does need to hand over log files including the IP address and usernames of people who viewed YouTube videos. This represents a huge violation of privacy and a clear violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA). This was the law we were just discussing, due to a lawsuit concerning Blockbuster revealing rental info via Facebook's Beacon program. It was originally passed after the video rental history of Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork was released in the press. The idea is that what movies you rent should be private info not to be shared.

The court pretty much ignored this law, only mentioning it in a footnote, suggesting that it only applies to video tapes. But, as the EFF points out in the link above, the law actually says "prerecorded video cassette tapes or similar audio visual materials." But, more to the point, it is not at all clear why Viacom should need this specific information. If it wants to show numbers of people who viewed certain videos, it seems that aggregate info should be sufficient. Having Google hand over much more info doesn't seem to serve any purpose related to the legal questions involved in the case. Update: There are now claims that Viacom will be very limited in how the data can be used -- with the threat of a contempt of court charge if anyone other than the lawyers involved in the case and specific experts see the data, but that's really not sufficient for privacy purposes. There's no way to make sure the data only stays in those hands, and even so it's still a violation of the privacy of users.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: lawsuits, log files, video rentals
Companies: google, viacom, youtube


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    ted, 3 Jul 2008 @ 11:05am

    “could be doing —— but are not —— to control infringement”

    I was reading thru the legal document at wired's blog and found it very weak that most of what Viacom is looking for is proof that google “could be doing —— but are not —— to control infringement” They obviously have no real evidence. This is a fishing expedition and should be dismissed. If viacom wants to see what people have been watching they can go to youtube and check. if its been pulled down, have google tell you how many people watched it.

    Also Viacom also gets in the decision
    "copies of all videos that were once available for public viewing on YouTube.com but later removed for any reason, or such subsets as plaintiffs designate"
    I wonder if there is any kiddie pr0n in that list? If so, Viacom should be brought up on charges for possession. And I urge every other copyright holder to sue Viacom for illegal possession and duplication of your protected work.

    The motion to produce youtube's database was granted so User ID and IP address for each view will be given to Viacom. It's also important to know that

    Viacom was granted access to the Google Video search schema to see if google could have done a better job blocking infringement. Which leads me to ask. Why should they? They are only asked to remove infringing video. Not censor the terms users search for.

    Viacom also wanted access to all the videos marked Private. However the judge denied this since the videos were posted with expected privacy and the user agreement helps support Google's side. The judge did however allow "specified non content data" to be released to Viacom.

    Perhaps I read it over to fast, but i did not see anywhere about the use of the data that was being handed over. I hope I just missed it.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.