Google to hand over YouTube user data

I hope Google wins
else this media house will bring down the internet anonymity and loads more low suedes that just harms every thing
 
can't wait for the outcome of this case. it will set a precedent for future copyright infringement cases. I really want Google to win, but if they do I think it will be a sad day media companies. They have to be able to protect their IP.
 
Maybe the users could all come together and sue for invasion of privacy as that is what it is.
 
Google: Don't do Evil - But Lose the Data to those who do.
 
This case is a perfect illustration of the consequences of having a judiciary preside over a case that they have absolutely no competence in the related field and are completely incapable of handling the case correctly. Pathetic really.

It is time for companies like viacom to die a very painful death and their employees, management, stockholders and lawyers be held personally liable for their actions.
 
icyrus said:
This case is a perfect illustration of having a judiciary preside over a case that they have absolutely no competence in the field and are completely incapable of handling correctly. Pathetic really.

It is time for companies like viacom to die a very painful death.
Click to expand...

noooooooo

then there will be no more south park! :eek:
 
Abe said:
This is crazy. It's what happens when non technical judge starts making decisions on technical matters.
Click to expand...

Agreed, they should be provided with technical advisers or someone to actually explain the case to them. :rolleyes:
 
Syndyre said:
Agreed, they should be provided with technical advisers or someone to actually explain the case to them. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

This judge should be disbarred for this ruling. Gross incompetence.
 
Viacom produced the content that was protected under copyright law. It was then copied onto youtube - a violation of copyright law. Since Google isn't responsible for the content that goes onto youtube under the act , the responsibility for that copied content being placed on youtube is that of the user.

Viacom now has to chase the user in order to prosecute them. Since Google has the details of those users , it would follow that it would need to remit that info to Viacom to prevent the obstruction of justice.

If Google wins - it then creates a precedent for anyone to go and copy , distribute and publish anyones content as they please with impunity.

It would create havoc if Google won - and the entire worldwide media industry would collapse.
 
retromodcoza said:
Viacom produced the content that was protected under copyright law. It was then copied onto youtube - a violation of copyright law. Since Google isn't responsible for the content that goes onto youtube under the act , the responsibility for that copied content being placed on youtube is that of the user.

Viacom now has to chase the user in order to prosecute them. Since Google has the details of those users , it would follow that it would need to remit that info to Viacom to prevent the obstruction of justice.

If Google wins - it then creates a precedent for anyone to go and copy , distribute and publish anyones content as they please with impunity.

It would create havoc if Google won - and the entire worldwide media industry would collapse.
Click to expand...

Rubbish rubbish rubbish rubbish. This post could win an award for its bullsh*t to length ratio.

First of all, viacom wants the details of every video watched by every user, whether it has anything to do with viacom's properties or not.

Ostensibly they want this data to try and prove that copyrighted content is more popular than user-created content hence increasing google's liability in the case and increasing their payout if they win. Needless to say that is not the real reason.

Secondly, there is no proof whatsoever that this form of copyright infringement has negatively affected viacom or its properties in any way. So what this case is really about is a large money grab by viacom at the deep pockets of google.

Given google's resources we can only hope they will appeal this ignorant judge's decision and end up stomping all over the soon-to-be-extinct dinosaur that is viacom.
 
icyrus said:
Rubbish rubbish rubbish rubbish. This post could win an award for its bullsh*t to length ratio.
Click to expand...

Theres a sensible , thought out answer.

First of all, viacom wants the details of every video watched by every user, whether it has anything to do with viacom's properties or not.
Click to expand...

I agree that Viacom only needs the details of the videos that affect them. However , how is it supposed to find out which users violated the copyright and which didn't? If Google is going to hand out user details on condition that they are relevant , how does Viacom know that Google is providing them with complete information? That one is going to be difficult.

It is much easier and simpler to hand over all the user data. Of course , there will be conditions attached to make sure the data is only used in the pursuit of justice , so Google is not going to be compromised.

Ostensibly they want this data to try and prove that copyrighted content is more popular than user-created content hence increasing google's liability in the case and increasing their payout if they win. Needless to say that is not the real reason.
Click to expand...

Why would they need to prove that copyrighted content is more popular? Copyrighted content is copyrighted content - and the loss derived from the breach of copyright needs to be paid for.

Secondly, there is no proof whatsoever that this form of copyright infringement has negatively affected viacom or its properties in any way. So what this case is really about is a large money grab by viacom at the deep pockets of google.
Click to expand...

But Google profits every single day from the content ripped from Viacom through Adsense on the Youtube site. How can that be right or legal?

Also , Viacom doesn't need to prove loss in order to stop the copyright violation. However , they will probably come up with some evidence that it has. It must be causing damage somewhere. What about the weakening of Viacoms brand through the poor video quality of youtube?

Given google's resources we can only hope they will appeal this ignorant judge's decision and end up stomping all over the soon-to-be-extinct dinosaur that is viacom.
Click to expand...

The judge does not have to know anything about technology to rule on this case. Its a question of copyrighted material.

He is also not ignorant. He did not rise to the position for being a fool. He did not suck this decision out of his thumb. Imagine the implications of the decision being overturned.

Both viacom and Googles lawyers are also not idiots. They did not undertake this case to grab money - Viacoms win in this regard would not boost their profitability. If copyright laws obviously weren't violated , then the case would have been thrown out before it could reach trial.
 
Last edited:
How can video, that can stream over a Telkom line, negatively affect Viacom?
Click to expand...

By Google profiting illegally from that streamed content that Viacomm created?
 
retromodcoza said:
I agree that Viacom only needs the details of the videos that affect them. However , how is it supposed to find out which users violated the copyright and which didn't? If Google is going to hand out user details on condition that they are relevant , how does Viacom know that Google is providing them with complete information? That one is going to be difficult.

It is much easier and simpler to hand over all the user data. Of course , there will be conditions attached to make sure the data is only used in the pursuit of justice , so Google is not going to be compromised.
Click to expand...

Viacom's claimed desire for the data is to increase google's liability in this case (and increase the compensation claim that they will wish to make) not to pursue the individual users hence they do not require personally identifiable info and yet they demanded it anyway. Funny that?

retromodcoza said:
Viacom doesn't need to prove loss in order to stop the copyright violation. However , they will probably come up with some evidence that it has. It must be causing damage somewhere.
Click to expand...

I don't think you have any understanding of this case. Viacom are not pushing this case as a way to get their material off of youtube but rather to fleece google's deep pockets for quick and easy money.

There is no independent proof of any damage, anywhere, ever. These sort of cases are the death-throws of a dying business model.

retromodcoza said:
The judge does not have to know anything about technology to rule on this case. Its a question of copyrighted material.

He is also not ignorant. He did not rise to the position for being a fool. He did not suck this decision out of his thumb. Imagine the implications of the decision being overturned.
Click to expand...

The judge in his infinite ignorance has violated the privacy of millions of people in and out of the United States in order to grease the pockets of a dirty corporation.

retromodcoza said:
Both viacom and Googles lawyers are also not idiots. They did not undertake this case to grab money. If copyright laws obviously weren't violated , then the case would have been thrown out before it could reach trial.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately in America justice is for sale to the highest bidder. The problem for viacom here is that unlike the old grannies and single moms that the RIAA and MPAA normally go after, google has a ton of money sitting around and a corporate image to uphold.

I fully expect this ruling to be appealed and overturned in short order.

As for "They did not undertake this case to grab money", why else would they be pursuing this case for extreme damages and trying to increase google's liability in the case if it wasn't about the money? Considering that google provide a number of measures that allow companies to report copyrighted material and have it removed?

Oh and why have they claimed over $1 billion in damages from google if its not a money grab? Its almost as if you have no idea about the case you are commenting on.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X