Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Wins Agreement To Anonymize YouTube Logs

Posted by timothy on from the have-in-my-hand-a-list dept.

Barence, following up on yesterday's news that Viacom is looking for videos uploaded by Google staff, links to an article at PC Pro, excerpting: "Google and Viacom have reached a deal to protect the privacy of millions of YouTube watchers. Earlier this month, a New York federal judge ordered Google to turn over YouTube user data to Viacom and other plaintiffs to help them prepare a confidential study of what they argue are vast piracy violations on the video-sharing site. Google claims it had now agreed to provide plaintiffs' attorneys with a version of a massive viewership database that blanks out YouTube usernames and IP addresses that could be used to identify individual video watchers."

11 of 242 comments (clear)

  1. subject by amnezick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    google playing the good guy again. at least they care .....

    --
    mov ax,4c00h
    int 21h
    1. Re:subject by apathy+maybe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe if they hadn't have kept all the information they wouldn't need to have that fight in the first place...

      I doubt they really care about anything except their image. "Yeah, we are the good guys", if they were really good they would have anonymised the information within days of them recording it.

      Remember, information comes in, statistics are collected, raw information disappears. This time Google "won", but next time it might be the CIA or another nasty agency.

      --
      I wank in the shower.
  2. Yikes... by trisweb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just the fact that such information exists and is stored is scary.

    Thank God for "Don't be evil." They better not be.

    --
    "!"
  3. Reminder: this does not preserve your privacy by Dekortage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a great reminder, once again, that Google actually HAS your username and video watching habits, and can use the info however it wants.

    --
    $nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
    1. Re:Reminder: this does not preserve your privacy by bravecanadian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree.

      I think it is funny how everyone is up in arms when Viacom might have gotten their hands on it.. and funny now that everything thinks that Google is the "good guy" for coming to an agreement with Viacom to anonymize the data.

      Meanwhile glossing over the fact that Google has and continues to use the very data they were so worried about.. every day to target ads and whatever other purposes they have or find in the future for it.

    2. Re:Reminder: this does not preserve your privacy by Chyeld · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think it's funny how people get upset over the idea that there are those of us who are OK with a company with a track record of Google's having more access to information on how we use their free services than we are OK with a company with the track record of Viacom or any other 'big media' having access to information on how we use someone else's services.

      Meanwhile glossing over the fact that the majority of the information Google keeps isn't really that personally identifying and helps them actually provide those free services in the first place.

    3. Re:Reminder: this does not preserve your privacy by jeffasselin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The difference I see is that when you go to YouTube or other Google services, you have a tacit understanding and agreement with Google that they will have access to this data, and you can read their privacy terms and agree to them when you use their services.

      You certainly don't expect other companies to also have that access.

      --
      If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
  4. Re:Not as it seems by snl2587 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Are they *all* wrong about their business?

    Quite possible. That's how an industry dies.

  5. Re:Okay then, what's the point? by Khaed · · Score: 5, Funny

    The point is that Viacom can find out that "the same person that viewed video X that infringes our copyright also viewed fifteen other videos that infringe our copyright; and he only looked at two that do not".

    I find it hilarious that they're going to pay someone to look at all these lines.

    I imagine it won't be a geek or someone with knowledge of the culture. And I can imagine the following moment.

    The guy/girl sets down a sheet of paper, rubs the bridge of their nose, and says, out loud: "Jesus Christ, when did Rick Astly get so popular?"

  6. Re:Not as it seems by gyranthir · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, they wanted the information to attempt to completely take down youtube.

    As they wanted to identify Youtube employees as uploaders of copyrighted content, youtube would lose it's ISP Safeharbor granted to them based on the DMCA ISP Safeharbor rules about illegal or copyrighted content on ISP's servers (they are not responsible for it, and do not have to proactively search for it).

    If they would lose that safeharbor clause they would be gone within weeks.

    Also they stated they weren't planning on going after individual users, but weren't going to rule it out..... Sound familiar? RIAA!!!!.

  7. What can these logs prove? by tiananmen+tank+man · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I enter the search term "Jon Stewart", and click on a video and watch it, what does that mean? Did I just watch a large unedited portion of the show on youtube? OR did I just watch somebody's imatation of jon stewart?

    The logs cant show either way, and viacom won't know unless they personally watch it.