Judge tells YouTube to turn over viewing logs

[RadioPatrol]

and what do the IP Addresses have to do with this:

Judge tells YouTube to turn over viewing logs to Viacom

3 July 2008 14:31 by Rich "vurbal" Fiscus | 11 comments
Judge tells YouTube to turn over viewing logs to Viacom A US District Court Judge Louis L. Stanton has ruled that Google must turn over to Viacom logs showing what videos have been watched on YouTube and when. The information will include login names and IP addresses for the viewers.

Viacom is suing the search giant for YouTube's allegedl failure to live up to their legal responsibility for actively combating piracy on the service. Google has owned YouTube in 2006.

Judge tells YouTube to turn over viewing logs to Viacom

[Goyde]

Well if they are looking for restitutions for viewed copyrighted materials then they will need to have a complete list of all viewers, this information will include IP addresses (if you think you can visit ANY site on the internet and they don't know where you are...I have a couple of bridges for sale..) This information will be used to determine 'losses' due to viewing, and enable the courts to come up with a valid number to throw at google. I seriously doubt each user will be identified, as most will be unaware they were violating copyright laws. But in this day and age, who knows.

[AndyMarquisLIVE (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Goyde

Well if they are looking for restitutions for viewed copyrighted materials then they will need to have a complete list of all viewers, this information will include IP addresses (if you think you can visit ANY site on the internet and they don't know where you are...I have a couple of bridges for sale..) This information will be used to determine 'losses' due to viewing, and enable the courts to come up with a valid number to throw at google. I seriously doubt each user will be identified, as most will be unaware they were violating copyright laws. But in this day and age, who knows.

No, it's worse than that.

Viacom wants to sue everyone who's uploaded content with Viacom content in it. They even said that would include people who had a TV turned to CBS in the background of a clip where they were singing for their personal webcam.

Fair Use doesn't exist anymore apparently.

It all comes down to money. Viacom is DESPERATE. CBS is a sinking ship, SpikeTV is a falling rock and their whole media empire is fizzling out, fast. Viacom is desperate for money, and they got a liberal judge who's paved the way for them to #### over their viewers to get it.

I won't even watch a football game on CBS now.

[AndyMarquisLIVE (Premo)]

There aren't any losses. Viacom is too damn stubborn to embrace internet streaming. They're responsible for their own losses.

Every other media outlet offers their stuff online, and in fact free of charge, and every other organization allows users to upload their content as long as they are given their due credit (via video annotations or etc).

Viacom just wants to go wholeshot here and use the typical liberal sue-everybody thing.

NBC Universal, Turner, NewsCorp and Disney saw there was a market in online multimedia, and they embraced it. Viacom did not.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Goyde

Well if they are looking for restitutions for viewed copyrighted materials then they will need to have a complete list of all viewers, this information will include IP addresses (if you think you can visit ANY site on the internet and they don't know where you are...I have a couple of bridges for sale..) This information will be used to determine 'losses' due to viewing, and enable the courts to come up with a valid number to throw at google. I seriously doubt each user will be identified, as most will be unaware they were violating copyright laws. But in this day and age, who knows.

They're trying to establish an argument for value. Nothing sinister here. Who the hell cares, why would anyone care, what you've been viewing? Where is the threat to liberty? Of course, anyone who has been viewing American Idle videos, I can see using that as a base line rational for deportation.

This is a business move.

[RadioPatrol]

Originally Posted by AndyMarquisLIVE

No, it's worse than that.

Viacom wants to sue everyone who's uploaded content with Viacom content in it. They even said that would include people who had a TV turned to CBS in the background of a clip where they were singing for their personal webcam.

Fair Use doesn't exist anymore apparently.

that is what I was thinking ..... but then you need an account on Youtube to upload so they should have some sort of reg info anyway ....



Bought CD's to computer illegal?

5th or so post down:

Pariser has a very broad definition of "stealing." When questioned by Richard Gabriel, lead counsel for the record labels, Pariser suggested that what millions of music fans do is actually theft. The dirty deed? Ripping your own CDs or downloading songs you already own.

Gabriel asked if it was wrong for consumers to make copies of music which they have purchased, even just one copy. Pariser replied, "When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Making "a copy" of a purchased song is just "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'," she said.

[RadioPatrol]

Originally Posted by AndyMarquisLIVE

Viacom just wants to go wholeshot here and use the typical liberal sue-everybody thing.

Sounds like the SCO Business Model ....

[ImnoMensa]

Bastids.

[shiki]

Originally Posted by RadioPatrol

and what do the IP Addresses have to do with this:




Judge tells YouTube to turn over viewing logs to Viacom

Just about everything. The ip is basically your internet fingerprint. What computer you are using, where that computer is, who you are...

[BOP]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

They're trying to establish an argument for value. Nothing sinister here. Who the hell cares, why would anyone care, what you've been viewing? Where is the threat to liberty? Of course, anyone who has been viewing American Idle videos, I can see using that as a base line rational for deportation.

This is a business move.

You say you like debate? How about this? Such a move on the part of the COURT could conceivably have a chilling affect on people's behavior.