Viacom gets to sniffle in YouTube user data

[Jediphile]

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080...utube-data.html

 

But Viacom did better when it came to accessing YouTube's massive databases. The first database requested contains all videos ever removed for any reason, which Viacom hopes will show just how many infringing videos YouTube has hosted over the years. The massive database will "require a total of about five person-weeks of labor without unexpected glitches, as well as the dedication of expensive computer equipment and network bandwidth." The total number of videos here is "intimidating," wrote the judge, but he granted Viacom's request anyway.

 

Next up is a 12TB database containing logging information on every video ever watched at YouTube. Viacom wants to see just how often infringing clips were viewed, then compare this against noninfringing ones to prove its contention that YouTube, in the early days, was an engine powered mostly by the gasoline of illegal content. The database will also show which username and IP address watched every video, a move with potential privacy implications.

 

The data set is large, but the judge noted that it could be slapped on three "over-the-shelf" 4TB drives. Request granted, score tied at 2-2.

 

So basically Viacom wants to see what videos have been uploaded to YouTube to see how infringing they are. Okay. And they want to see how often those allegedly infringing videos have been seen. Okay. So they need all YouTube username and IP address information of everyone who ever visited YouTube for that, right?

 

Woah - hold on a second... YouTube has a count for each video ever show. That being the case, why does Viacom need to see my YouTube historic (or yours)? Let alone what right they have to it... I smell something fishy... as in "fishing expedition". Meanwhile the sound hear in the background is the death rattle of privacy rights. Why am I suddenly so glad I've never had an account on YouTube? And why does court bend over backwards to Viacom's whims? Sure, they protected YouTube/Google's "right" to keep their source code and video ID to themselves - that's workproduct. But when it comes to the rights of the user, the protection magically evaporates... Seems to me like court is only interested in protecting the rights of big business - who can afford legal representation - while the rights of the average Joe gets thrown to the winds...

 

EDIT: A related video: http://news.cnet.com/1606-2_3-50002896.html?tag=nefd.top

 

Oh, and on the related subject, happy 4. of July, USA

Edited July 4, 2008 by Jediphile

[LadyCrimson]

I can understand wanting to stop/reduce infringing video uploads - I don't think anyone can deny that YouTube users do that all the time & that YouTube has done almost nothing to prevent it out of fear people would stop using YouTube - but this is pretty ridiculous, because of:

 

The database will also show which username and IP address watched every video, a move with potential privacy implications.

 

YouTube does have the "views for this video" stat, but it's not necessarily accurate, since it can/does record multiple views from the same IP/user.

I'm not clear, but I'm not positive Viacom actually wanted the usernames etc. specifically, just accurate view stat information w/all the duplicate views eliminated, and perhaps those two things go together. Not knowing how such databases work, it feels a little odd that there isn't any other way of giving Viacom the stat information it wants w/out also having to fork over such information.

 

The one bright side is that at least the judge had the brains to say no to the other things Viacom wanted.

Edited July 4, 2008 by LadyCrimson

[Meshugger]

My message to Viacom: "Go F*CK YOURSELF"

 

And good luck trying to pry on IP's located in the EU. It is a clear breach of privacy of it's citizens.

[random n00b]

I'm going to quote myself from the other thread - I'm just that lazy.

 

We have far more to fear from the entertainment industry

Wow, I hadn't read that at first.

 

Anyway, in this case it's not only the industry being greedy that pisses me off, that's to be expected. It's the mindboggling decisions made by jurists.

 

"Viacom also requested YouTube's source code, the code for identifying repeat copyright infringement uploads, copies of all videos marked private, and Google's advertising database schema."

 

It was denied. But I think there's something definitely wrong with a system that allows them to request to violate privacy in such a scale and in a systematic manner. That's the kind of thing that encourages me to download stuff illegally, even if I have no intention of watching/playing/listening to it. Great job.

[Humodour]

I can understand wanting to stop/reduce infringing video uploads - I don't think anyone can deny that YouTube users do that all the time & that YouTube has done almost nothing to prevent it out of fear people would stop using YouTube

 

I'm sorry, but could you justify that? YouTube has probably done more to do free advertising for the entertainment industry than it ever has to damage it through piracy.

 

You'll note YouTube doesn't allow more than 10 minute long videos and the quality is not good (about 200 to 300kbps per second - DVD quality is about 40 times that) and the size is only 320 * 240. Audio is similarly low quality. It also immediately takes down any show it is requested to (you know - the legal DMCA way). You'd have to be pretty desperate, determined and uninformed to successfully use YouTube to consistently view illegal material. YouTube is first and foremost an exposure service - piracy doesn't really even rank in there, as this data will no doubt prove, and which some more prominent entertainment companies like Sony seem to have already figured out and capitalised on.

 

YouTube isn't profitable for Google, and it eats about $1 million in bandwidth each day. So I'm bemused as to how Viacom thinks it can show Google profits off Viacom's supposed losses.

 

Random n00b and Mesh are spot on. And apparently Viacom is currently planning to launch their own video sharing service to rival YouTube... they don't want to win this case - they want free access to multi-million dollar data.

 

The database will also show which username and IP address watched every video, a move with potential privacy implications.

 

I'm not clear, but I'm not positive Viacom actually wanted the usernames etc. specifically, just accurate view stat information w/all the duplicate views eliminated, and perhaps those two things go together. Not knowing how such databases work, it feels a little odd that there isn't any other way of giving Viacom the stat information it wants w/out also having to fork over such information.

 

Google wants to anonymise the data. Viacom wants usernames and IPs. Go figure.

Edited July 5, 2008 by Krezack

[Laozi]

This is the worse thing to ever happen in the world

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

of warcraft

[Kor Qel Droma]