See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Google Ordered To Release Data On YouTube Users
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.informationweek.com/news ... icle.jhtml?articleID=208802490
Published: Jul 3, 2008
Author: K.C. Jones
Post Date: 2008-07-03 15:28:55 by angle
Keywords: None
Views: 196
Comments: 14
The owner of YouTube has to turn over user login IDs, records showing when users watched videos, their IP addresses, and numbers that identify the videos. The judge hearing Viacom (VIAB)'s $1 billion copyright-infringement claim against Google has ordered its YouTube unit to provide user histories. Google has to turn over millions of videos it has removed from the video-sharing site, user login IDs, records showing when users watched videos, their IP addresses, and numbers that identify the videos. The order applies not only to videos watched on YouTube but also to videos embedded on third-party Web sites. Google (NSDQ: GOOG) tried to argue that the request, for about 12 TB of data, was unduly burdensome, but U.S. District Judge Louis L. Stanton determined that it would be easy to copy. The search engine company also argued that Viacom's request for the information threatened user privacy because it would disclose viewing and video uploading patterns and link them with login IDs and IP addresses. Stanton characterized those concerns as "speculative" and said Google failed to provide legal justification for that argument. Stanton did decide in Google's favor by turning down requests for proprietary information: indexes showing how Google organizes its videos and ads, as well as the source code for YouTube search, Google search, and the company's new video ID program. The judge also ruled in Google's favor on two other points. He denied Viacom's request for titles, keywords, comments, and flags for inappropriate content, saying that request was too broad. He also declared that private videos uploaded by a user sharing with one other user are protected under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. Viacom sought the records to prove its claim that YouTube and Google encourage or promote copyright infringement by its users. The case is being heard in federal court in Manhattan. Privacy advocates said that YouTube users' privacy rights would be violated if the information is released. Google's position (and explantion) for saving your searches and IP's can be found at this fabulous Information Week article. "Google Argues User Data Is Public Info" www.informationweek.com/b...xt=search+engines+privacy Or maybe you prefer this article: "Google Has A Privacy Policy That Doesn't Offer Privacy" www.informationweek.com/b...xt=search+engines+privacy Comments from article:
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 11.
#2. To: angle, All, Pinguinite (#0)
I use Scroogle instead of Google, see for yourself why it's a good alternative search function: www.scroogle.org/cgi- bin/scraper.htm Encryption protocol feature: https://ssl.scroogle.org/sslnote.html
Scroogle uses Google, so it acts as a proxy for Google searches for now. I wouldn't trust them, there is a reason Google hasn't blocked them. If you want private searches using Google then use an offshore proxy that doesn't keep logs.
#13. To: RickyJ (#11)
Scroogle admits that they could be shut down by Google: "no cookies, no search-term records, access log deleted within 48 hours" Since Scroogle does just one thing, it is fairly fast and simple. But because it does only one thing, it is vulnerable to action by Google. They could block our IP address, which would require that we relay requests to other servers that are more difficult for them to locate. They could also centralize their system more in order to better detect and throttle any outside address that does too many searches per minute. Finally, they could make minor changes in their output format on a regular basis, which would break our scraper and require frequent reprogramming. Any of the above might quickly get too complex and expensive for us, and that would be the end of Scroogle. One action that Google is less likely to take is to serve Scroogle with a cease and desist letter. This introduces the second reason why Scroogle deserves support. As a nonprofit with a history of activism on privacy issues, it would be difficult for Google to sue us on the grounds that their search results and rankings are copyrighted. The main reason for this is that we are noncommercial. None of our sites has ever carried ads, we have zero employees, and our gross annual income is about $10,000. Our lack of commercial intent strengthens our claim that we have the right to scrape Google. It's obvious that we are doing it in the public interest We remain vulnerable to blocking, throttling, or breaking by Google, which unfortunately is legal if they decide to stop us. But the longer Scroogle exists and the more our traffic grows, the stronger our statements become. We cannot survive many more months without at least one more server, even if Google leaves us alone. While we could apply for foundation grants, our experience tells us that foundations are about ten years behind on Internet and other high-tech issues. Any funding proposals we send out would strike them as bizarre and incomprehensible. It's not worth our time to send out proposals to foundations. That leaves us asking lots of Scroogle users for small contributions. Searchers who prefer Scroogle are making a unique statement about important issues. Nothing else we know of is making the same points as effectively.
Where does one find this bastion of freedom ... or how ??? Scroogle google for and offshore proxy ???
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#11. To: X-15 (#2)
(Edited)
I use Scroogle instead of Google, see for yourself why it's a good alternative search function:
Replies to Comment # 11. 
#14. To: RickyJ (#11)
If you want private searches using Google then use an offshore proxy that doesn't keep logs.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 11.