February 13, 2007

YouTube Hands Over User’s Info to Fox

Marshall Kirkpatrick

46 comments »

Three weeks after receiving a subpoena from the U.S. District Court in Northern California, YouTube has reportedly identified a user accused by 20th Century Fox Television of uploading episodes of the show 24 a week prior to their running on television.   That user, named ECOTtotal, is also alleged to have uploaded 12 episodes of The Simpsons, some quite old.  Apparently Google and YouTube were willing and able to identify the owner of the username ECOTtotal, acording to a report on InternetNews.com.

Some observers hoped when the subpoenas came to light that Google’s history of resisting US government subpoenas would lead to non-cooperation in this case.  The moral high ground is clearly far smaller in this case, though.  YouTube has handed over user names before upon request prior to its acquisition.

If the episodes of 24 was already circulating on P2P networks before they hit YouTube, as some reports suggest, then this is little more than a symbolic blood letting.  It’s not nearly as reprehensible as some of Yahoo’s actions in China, where the company has allegedly handed over information on a number of users accused of subversive activities by the Chinese government.  Some of those users have been sent to prison for years.

None the less, I wonder how YouTube users will feel about the company’s disclosure of personal information.  While there was a fair amount of concern raised when the subpoenas were issued, I’m going to guess that most YouTube users will tolerate or even support the company’s decision.  Perhaps the rest will stop linking their personal information to accounts used in illicit activities.  Privacy experts report that it’s the simple things that get most people burned.

Still, with the Viacom purge, harsh words from NBC and now this all occurring in the first half of February, it’s possible that YouTube could be a very different place in the near future.

Marshall Kirkpatrick is the Director of Content at SplashCast and will be assisting with TechCrunch while Michael Arrington travels.

  • Sphere It

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

  1. Three Leaf Tech - Technology Blog
  2. College Marketing 4.0
  3. Geek And Poke
  4. technologytalk.net » The CopyFight Against YouTube | A look at technology's role in modern culture

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Rahul

    Sounds fair to me.

  2. datter

    Offtopic, but nice touch slipping in a link to Splashcast like that. Spiffy… in a sleazy marketing guy sort of way.

  3. Ryan Stewart

    Mike, You should have done this as a YouTube video blog so we could see all the video responses. ;)

  4. Marshall Kirkpatrick

    Datter, I see you made sure to fill out the URL field in your comment too. Nice touch… :)

  5. Ryan Stewart

    Mike = Marshall (oye)

  6. Jonathan Cohen

    Let’s see how they do with less-egregious violations. If they go after someone for a 3-minute clip from an old Family Guy episode, THEN I’m betting you’ll see a user uproar.

  7. datter

    “Datter, I see you made sure to fill out the URL field in your comment too. Nice touch…”

    Oh. Please. You’ve got more on the ball than that don’t you?

  8. Jeff

    Or Marshall you could convince Mike to get MobaTalk and get the video comments right here. LoL. Skype me!

  9. Bill

    I’ve never posted anything to youtube, partially because the quality sucks, but also because anything I’d have to put out there that the general public would want to see would probably be copyrighted material that I pulled from my Tivo.

    Anyone who thought they were posting things there without possible repercussions probably needs to learn this lesson.

  10. Patricia

    I don’t think it’s a coincidence that suddenly, the only non-entertainment industry player (google) in new media is getting kicked by traditional entertainment companies.

  11. Combat Films and Research

    We agree with Bill, “Anyone who thought they were posting things there without possible repercussions probably needs to learn this lesson”.

    We have no problem releasing content we produce to the public as we see necessary. To have someone broadcast your content before you, the maker does… That’s BAD, with a capital B.

    Just because you can get it, access it, move it, distort it, send it, announce it, doesn’t mean you own it or are autorhized to do so.

  12. cd

    “Still, with the Viacom purge, harsh words from NBC and now this all occurring in the first half of February, it’s possible that YouTube could be a very different place in the near future.”

    No wonder Chad and Steve (and investors) cashed out as soon as possible. I was suprised there wasn’t more of a lockup on that Google stock deal. 3 month period is very, very short in these types of deals. Maybe everyone knew even back then that the dyke walls were going to leak soon.

  13. Sascha

    I don’t really need to state the obvious, but I’ll do it anyway: There is a very weak (to non-existent) sense of accountability or responsibility for actions on the web, especially amongst youngsters and teenagers who grew up with the internet and still somehow believe everything they do is completely anonymous (otherwise they would finally learn that threatening your teacher on MySpace can lead to serious actions).

    Nobody would ever go to a store, steal a couple of DVDs, and then put them outside their house for everybody who wants to have them. Publishing videos on YouTube like that is pretty much the digital equivalent of that action, but I’m sure ECOTtotal thought it was “not a big deal”, that he was doing everybody “a favor”, heck I’m sure he was even proud of himself showing off his cool tv piracy connections.

    People need to learn that anonymity on the web is more and more becoming a myth, since all the big players have the hardware and space to keep logs of everybody browsing by, and finding out which IP did a certain action on a certain day at a certain time is nothing more than a simple database query, and the ISPs are more often than not more than happy to give out the user account information for that IP (by accessing their own logs).

    The only way to make it harder for the companies to seek legal action is by going across country borders, but I have the feeling ECOTtotal was operating from inside the US. However, even when doing stuff from a different country it will only be a matter of time until governments start cooperating more quickly to bring the responsible person to light.

  14. Jeff

    YouTube,

    Crap videos, crap quality.

    Google are in it for the ads that can shove down the kids throats.

    It’s not about quality of content, if it was Google wouldn’t suck so much a a search engine.

    Another star up will beat YT as soon as the kids tire of ads and censorship

    Jeff

  15. drew olanoff

    It’s about to get ugly y’all.

  16. Amit Raman

    Bad decision Google.

    -Amit
    http://www.ipatrons.com

  17. Jeff N

    Right on Sascha.

    I thought the whole “all information is free” movement grew up and figured out that just because you can access something does not give you the right to redistribute it… free or otherwise. Looking at YouTube there is a lot of snippets of shows and commercials that folks have cut and pasted. No ownership, nor originality there.

    Cheers,
    Jeff N
    jeffn@startupattitude.com
    http://www.startupattitude.com

  18. Allen Stern

    Sascha - your post is very interesting. It is the same thing as when someone lifts an entire article I (or anyone else) writes and puts it on their site. You wouldn’t steal a book from Borders would you?

    I think the issue here with the 24 eps was that they were posted ahead of time.

    I also agree with Jeff about the ads.

    Im betting by 2009 we will all have Internet ID cards.

  19. YouTube

    Wow, it seems I’m the only one that finds YouTube extremely useful. I agree that most of the content you’ll find there violates copyright restrictions, but there is also a wealth of useful, completely legal videos (v.g., guitar lessons).

  20. Paul Irish

    Marshall, the googlejuice you’ll get from dropping your link in all these posts is enough to cause datter’s concern. As for us lowly commenters, the rel=nofollow means we get none of google’s love.

    And re: youtube turning over its users to the police. Fuck that.

  21. Marshall Kirkpatrick

    Paul and Datter, I’m puting that sentence at the end of one post a day so I think we’ll all live. Thanks for putting it plainly re YouTube and btw, I love Aurgasm.

  22. Tester23

    As far as I see, YouTube had no choice but to release this information else they would be in legal hotwater because lack of cooperation with a court process in identifying an infringing user could be construed as collusion with that user, especially since the DMCA Safe Harbor statutes are so vague in nature.

  23. Chris

    M-

    Nice post. It’s nice to have you back on TC - even if it’s just for a bit.

    -C

  24. Marcus

    POT
    KETTLE
    BLACK!!!

    seriously, how many gigs of copyrighted material must there be on myspace!??!

    judging by the myspace relationship with google and youtube being owned by google, this has got to draw similarities with the time fox allegidly sued itself:
    http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/3745.html

    this is a seriously stupid move. just as the RIAA suing random people for sharing mp3s, this won’t have any effect on distribution of their TV shows on the internet just as the RIAA didn’t have any effect on mp3 sharing on p2p networks. i can’t see anything other than bad PR coming of this. i wonder what the folks at FOX interactive think……

    Marcus

  25. Sprague Dawley

    Content providers are showing muscle in order to strengthen their hand in negotiations. I doubt they’re interested in court fights — they want revenue sharing and partner relationships in posting of content.

    Youtube is morphing from a business dependent upon free, user-provided (stolen) content to a version of mini-TV. What I don’t get is why Google is dragging the process out — especially when their other hand is trying to become a media buying intermediary between large advertisers and media companies… unless, perhaps, this plays into the terms under negotiation.

    With the speed that things happen on the Interweb, the delay could allow a competitor their chance…

  26. Spud

    Will this result in people thinking twice about posting copyright videos? It may not be Google’s policy to hand over user details in the past but it is clearly YouTubes policy and I guess seems they are owned by Google it’s now Google’s policy.

  27. Jeremy Steele

    I have an idea to solve all these problems and stop future ones, stop illegally uploading content!

  28. datter

    “Paul and Datter, I’m puting that sentence at the end of one post a day so I think we’ll all live.”

    How about TechCrunch’s regular paying advertisers? Those little ad units up there run for $10,000 per month a piece on this site you know, and you’re getting a link-a-day for free… you could at least be a bit more conciliatory rather than so defensive.

    When it comes right down to it, your attitude sucks… so yay for Splashcast.

  29. Mr. Smith

    I just hope YouTube doesn’t tell my ex about that video I posted.

  30. tard

    Sascha wrote:

    “Nobody would ever go to a store, steal a couple of DVDs, and then put them outside their house for everybody who wants to have them. Publishing videos on YouTube like that is pretty much the digital equivalent of that action.”

    Bad analogy. Stealing is NOT the equivalent of copying.

  31. Larry

    WTF! Anyone STUPID enough to post copyrighted material on-line in violation of the law deserves to be nailed. Youtube was built on people violating copyrights by doing stupid crap with someone else’s music and/or videos in it. It’s obvious that Youtube has never been willing or able to abide by copyright law.

    Anyone with any sense just copies movies or cds directly instead of putting it on-line where they can be tracked. Eventually, they’ll go after the little guy just like they have done with pot smokers. 88% of those in jail for pot offenses are in for possesion, not distribution.

    Get over it.

  32. Eric B

    “Bad analogy. Stealing is NOT the equivalent of copying.”

    Yes, the analogy is slightly flawed, but if downloading an illicit copy of a show/game/whatever causes one not to purchase a legitimate copy then the end result to the copyright holder is the same.

    The problem that most people have with the above analogy is that they are looking at it through too narrow of scope.

    While I dislike the heavy handed techniques of many of the media companies, I also find the wide spread support of copyright infringement to be sickening as well. I’m sick of seeing Digg/slashdot/whatever hip new cool tech news site filled with all the latest pirating technology and methods.

  33. Rex Dixon

    I will say this, they use to say it was great to burn books that were bad for the people. I think YouTube is trying hard to come off nice and clean. Wash their hands of their past. The funny thing is that you can’t just erase the past. It doesn’t work like, at least not in 2007.

    Rex

  34. Shahid

    “Youtube was built on people violating copyrights by doing stupid…”

    The whole culture of filesharing is built on copyright violations. If you think YT is full of it, check out Rapidshare, Megaupload, or the like. Commercial sites able to charge a monthly subscription fee, for the sole purpose of facilitating these violations. They’re not even like torrent trackers who can claim they host nothing illegal, they just index .torrent files - but instead they exist solely to make infinging easier. Gofigure…

  35. bogdan

    i think that all these problems represent the agony of an old system… services like youtube represent the future. don’t fight with them, use them!!!

  36. Alex

    Datter: Quit moaning. Honestly. Go outside and get some fresh air - will this bother you tomorrow?

  37. Snurd

    Datter: grow the f&^% up, child.

    drew: you got it right, man. Big takeaway from this is the impact it will have on the uploaders once it’s known that YT will give you up for a pack of smokes.

  38. Lloyd

    Shahid is correct - im suprised YouTube has survived for so long - how can any decent content stay on there in view of everyone? rapidshare et al is where the future is at because the little guys actions are virtually protected (or at least much better protected than YouTube clients) - if you give an uploaded file an arbitary name its almost impossible for that file to be located without you publishing the link.

    The web will become a much more policed environment in the future but dont think for one minute that it will be easy for them.

  39. datter

    “Datter: Quit moaning. Honestly. Go outside and get some fresh air - will this bother you tomorrow?”

    No, I won’t “quit moaning”.

    People make a big deal about big issues (sometimes) but often overlook the small ones. This means circumstances get held to to higher standards than others… and being blind to the little things doesn’t do anyone any favors.

  40. Paul Irish

    Thx Marshall. :)

  41. datter is a loser

    DATTER:

    wow..
    you seriously need to take a chill pill.. and um.. stop being so miserable. no one cares but you.

    and if you dont like it.. dont come here.

  42. Ben

    i like the comments as much as the article!!