BF2S Forums Google Must Divulge YouTube Log

Shit... now the US government is gonna know I listen to metal and I like to watch 'yoga 4 dudes.'

Seriously though, "a set-back to privacy rights" is a major understatement. I seriously think that nobody in the US government gives two damns about the Constitution anymore.

there is no right to privacy in the US.

Lol BL pedos.

God Save the Queen wrote:

there is no right to privacy in the US.

Not sure if you were being facetious... I think you could argue that the fourth amendment addresses privacy.

edit: In fact it seems to... now, whether "effects" applies to things like information on computers is another argument... ideally, a court would rule that it does apply.

Last edited by HurricaИe (2008-07-03 09:03:34)

You people do realize that Google (a private company) is being ordered to turn over logs to Viacom (a private company) who is claiming copyright infringement, don't you?

The government isn't a player beyond the court.

like they dont have the ability already.   people get worried about the wrong things here.

Braddock wrote:

Google must divulge the viewing habits of every user who has ever watched any video on YouTube, a US court has ruled. The ruling comes as part of Google's legal battle with Viacom over allegations of copyright infringement. Digital rights group the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) called the ruling a "set-back to privacy rights".

How long before the Government start trying to get a piece of this info so they can build political profiles of all YouTube users?

The government isn't getting the logs... Viacom is. I have noting to fear and no privacy is being infringed upon. Google and Youtube are Public Domains used by 100s of millions of people. You worried about some of your searches you put on the web? Then dont use a computer. You are accessing their network and their servers connecting through your web browser.

news.bbc.uk and every other media outlet reporting this wrote:

While the legal battle between the two firms is being contested in the US, it is thought the ruling will apply to YouTube users and their viewing habits everywhere.

Viacom, which owns MTV and Paramount Pictures, has alleged that YouTube is guilty of massive copyright infringement.

The UK's Premier League association is also seeking class action status with Viacom on the issue, alledging YouTube has been used to watch football highlights.

Legal action

When it initiated legal action in March 2007 Viacom said it had identified about 160,000 unauthorised clips of its programmes on the website, which had been viewed more than 1.5 billion times.

Following the launch of its billion-dollar lawsuit, YouTube introduced filtering tools in an effort to prevent copyright materials from appearing on the site.

What you should be worried about is if you uploaded and episodes of any Paramount movie or UK football games, etc. Other wise after this long case comes to a close the logs will not (ever) be freely given out to the government or made public. Whiners.

they are not censoring the internet. they are prosecuting presumed criminals that stole their (media) property. Theft is theft; whether that is in a grocery store or over fiber optic lines.

you wrote the word "viacom" without the copyright symbol next to it

wait, so did I

HurricaИe wrote:

God Save the Queen wrote:

there is no right to privacy in the US.

Not sure if you were being facetious... I think you could argue that the fourth amendment addresses privacy.

edit: In fact it seems to... now, whether "effects" applies to things like information on computers is another argument... ideally, a court would rule that it does apply.

No, there is no constitutional right to privacy.  It was most likely taken for granted back in the 18th century.  If we want one, we need to have a Constitutional Convention to establish one, not try to weasel existing ammendments to cover it.  4th Ammedment is "unlawful searces and seizures."  It may cover this, but that does not make the 4th ammendment an automatic privacy ammendment.

Pug wrote:

This is interesting...

I know that Major League Baseball recently lost a suit against a rotorisss  rotersorry rotissserrie  rotisssqqqqqqqerrie screw it, fantasy baseball software providers and websites for using their team and player names.  The ruling had to do with the argument MLB is entertainment and in the public eye, so they can't protect their names.  TV is public...this seems like a contradiction.

I think it will be pretty difficult to nab the uploaders, as they aren't profiting in any way from the alleged copyright infringement. YouTube, on the other hand...