Published: Jul 03, 2008 - 09:55 am
Story Found By: DavidWallace 1421 Days ago
Category: SEM
7 Comments
7 Comments
Search 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:
Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Search Marketing Now. Upcoming online events include:
Comments
So now the courts get to decide site by site what can be private. Its a slippery slope.
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 theyre done getting everything removed from youtube, theyll go and PAY Itunes to do what youtube did for free, only Itunes will deliver less traffic. brilliant!
I especially like Dannys postscript addition about his phone call to the judges office. "Thats T-E-C-H-M-E-M-E-DOT-COM, I spelled out." LOL
Im 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 Googles services.
Viacom risk making themselves very unpopular with people.
This is not a case pursuing individuals, but it is a watershed case.If it suceeds, its only a matter of time b4 Utube goes down.The weight of liturgy will drown it.When uploading photos, (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..
Postscript 3 is kind of interesting but doesnt change anything from your original story if I read it right. Viacom is saying they dont 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 doesnt mean it wont 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.