Sorry this site requires JavaScript to be enabled in your browser. See the following guide on How to enable JavaScript in Internet Explorer, Netscape, Firefox and Safari. Alternatively you may be blocking JavaScript with an advert-related or developer plugin. Please check your browser plugins.

Danny Sullivan writes, "You have no privacy on YouTube. So effectively declared a US judge yesterday. And now somebody in the US government better stop grandstanding about search and privacy protection and actually get some laws enacted now. Yesterday’s move might be the ultimate incentive, as US politicians realize that what they’ve watched on YouTube may now be open season."
Comments7 Comments  

Comments

Avatar
from WaterGuy 1421 Days ago #
Votes: 1

So now the courts get to decide site by site what can be private.  It’s a slippery slope.

Avatar
from DarkMatter 1421 Days ago #
Votes: 0

millions of people are sharing these links, informing new people about these shows and movies and music, and they want to stop it. what a bunch of fools. Once they’re done getting everything removed from youtube, they’ll go and PAY Itunes to do what youtube did for free, only Itunes will deliver less traffic. brilliant!

Avatar
from KenJones 1421 Days ago #
Votes: 0

I especially like Danny’s postscript addition about his phone call to the judges office.  "That’s T-E-C-H-M-E-M-E-DOT-COM, I spelled out." LOL

Avatar
from danagyt 1421 Days ago #
Votes: 0

I’m not a Google basher, but judging from the excerpts of the transcript, it seems as though they are being very, very evil here.  It appears they do not want to go on the record saying that IP addresses and user names could identify people, because that could limit their use of that information for their own profit in the future.  So instead of protecting their users’ privacy, they are completely selling them out so that they can monetize them better in the future.  Wow.  This definitely makes me reconsider my relationship with Google’s services. 

Avatar
from AndrewGirdwood 1421 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Viacom risk making themselves very unpopular with people.

Avatar
from tykeblog 1421 Days ago #
Votes: 0

This is not a case pursuing individuals, but it is a watershed case.If it suceeds, it’s only a matter of time b4 Utube goes down.The weight of liturgy will drown it.When uploading photo’s, (to iStock), you have to have signed model release forms for every individual in a photo.Strictly inforcing current IP legislation, YouTube would be exactly the same.Think about it..

Avatar
from danagyt 1421 Days ago #
Votes: 1

Postscript 3 is kind of interesting but doesn’t change anything from your original story if I read it right.  Viacom is saying they don’t want personally identifiable indormation.  Google is saying IP address and user name are not personally identifiable.  So they are still going to get this info.  And being restricted from using information for a certain purpose doesn’t mean it won’t happen. "Confidential" information is leaked constantly.  Just ask Valerie Plame or Barry Bonds. The only way to stop people from using it is to stop access.  This only strengthens my argument that Google is selling out its users’ privacy by saying this info cannot identify them.  If they had said it could, Viacom would probably not get this data. 

Upcoming Conferences

Search Marketing ExpoSearch Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.



Join us at an upcoming SMX event:

Upcoming Webcasts

Search Marketing Now Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Search Marketing Now. Upcoming online events include: