The recent court order directing Google to hand over data to Viacom about every YouTube video ever watched strikes many people as an absurd overreach of the law into the privacy of anyone who has ever used YouTube (i.e., almost everyone on the Internet). Google should definitely keep fighting the ruling if it can.
But if it can’t, perhaps it should comply with it in a creative way. The data in question are data logs containing the records of every video watched on YouTube, by whom, and at what times. The court is also ordering that Google hand over all videos that have ever been taken down for any reason. The logs alone take up 12 terabytes. Google should print them out and deliver them on paper.
It would literally fill up the Library of Congress. That is roughly the equivalent of all the printed books in the Library of Congress (by one estimate, others put it at 20 terabytes—either way, it’s a lot of paper). The court order never states what form, the data must be delivered in.
(Photo via, appropriately enough, the Library of Congress And hat tip to reader Paul Christiansen for the original suggestion).
thats a lot of trees
I love it. Erick - you’re a genius!
That’s a lot of “logs”
Youtube had a total disregard for copyrights and Google knew it when they bought them. What goes around comes around.
How many trees would 20 would it take to print out 20 terabytes of data?….
Hey Viacom: stop being a bunch of douche bags.
What’s the point of this post?
erick - please delete the comment of the a-hole who posted the readtheanswer link.. so lame.
Nice idea. But a huge of paper, so I wouldn’t actually do it.
Punch cards. I suggest punch cards.
how about Microfiche? Let them scan it and digest it on their own time and dime.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-microfiche.htm
No. They should zip the data up, split it up into 1.4MB split RAR archives, and then deliver 9 million floppy disks.
… or a Microfiche with a watermark to discourage unauthorized reproduction.
“anyone who has ever used YouTube (i.e., almost everyone on the Internet). ”
wrong
“Google should print them out and deliver them on paper.”
did this tech crunch author even read the court order? wow
…so Google should pay the damages, not hand us over to the wolves!
“Google should print them out and deliver them on paper.” I think you are mad for saying that.
So you want trees to die just to send off some papers to Viacom?
While I think this idea is splendid, there was actually an Act passed by Congress a few years ago requiring that all inforrmation and documents presented in the discovery phase of a case be made available via electronic format.
It was an effort to keep the System up-to-date in case of an event just like this one. I can’t recall the name of the Act at the moment, but I’ll poke around and see if I can’t dig it up.
(Interestingly enough, I learned this at the Personal Democracy Forum last month in NYC, which I attended because of a pass I got from TechCrunch!)
My issue is that YouTube and Google *are* clearly in the wrong here. Sure, Viacom are being douche’s. But that we’re pulling for Google on this blows my mind. Google/YouTube stole. Clearly. Knowingly. And they still aren’t really doing anything about it.
Viacom being douche’s within their legal rights is somehow worse than Google being assholes *outside* of theirs?
Google shot itself in the foot by blaming users for the copyright violations under DMCA. The judge has responded in kind, requesting data on those users who acted as part of the violation. The form of the data is irrelevant - if Google complies (which it will because the alternative is to give up its source-code), it will litereally DESTROY YouTube just like Napster was destroyed. We still have Hulu though…(who’s ClownCo. now?)
Hey, here’s an idea: how about our American friends get their elected representatives to scrap the DMCA anyway? Then we can stop having to deal with this poo once and for all.
(of course it’s political)
@19
But it is not Google/YouTube who are ripping the videos, it is the users. If Google are held responsible, then are you suggesting that they vet every single item posted?
whatever happens, Google should at least pay any court-awarded damages in pennies…
I got yer legal tender RIGHT HERE!
Erick, are you trying to replace Duncan by commenting on legal processes on which you have done absolutely no research?
Think of the trees!
No they should deliver them on something painful like 5 1/4 floppies.
What they should do is not comply.
i understand where they are coming from but they do not need that data at all.
Google shouldn’t print that out, they should fax it to Viacom and let them foot the bill themselves.
@Player-x That’s innovative.
Google should deliver the logs in a stream of encrypted data at 1kb
will somebody, please, think of the trees?
According to CNet, the court specifically states that the data is to be handed over on multiple 1TB hard drives.
But since we’re having fun, I suggest Google output the logs on olde timey 1 inch wide ticker tape….. printed in binary.
(I win)
How is this an invasion of privacy? Google has this information anyway, so its there whether you like it or not.
YouTube has profited from copyrighted content and therefore is open to face these accusations, requiring them to hand over their data to prove their “innocence.”
Now, in what format it is handed over in is up to the “don’t be evil” chiefs… But one would argue, printing 12 terabytes of data on paper is “evil,” by way of wasting trees.
Google screwed it’s community on this one, by trying to explain how on the one hand they are able to keep pornography off of YouTube, and on the other they are unable to remove copyrighted materials.
Regardless of how you feel about producers of media, they have rights that need to be protected, ESPECIALLY if google is going to try and profit of providing copies of their products.
Send them in Tree form its better for the environment
Greenpeace co-founder says use more trees, not less
http://tinyurl.com/6×2awg
ugh… do we have to go over this again?
The absolute BEST way to combat CO2 in the atmosphere is to cut down LOTS of trees and bury the wood in a land fill.
Printing out 20 TB on paper and storing it in a giant filing cabinet is the BEST thing we could do to help the environment. Viacom should demand the data in paper form and then sell the carbon credits to Gore.
willie, are you serious? Tree’s soak up cO2.
There should be smarter ways to prevent this rule to be implemented. But this is a good one, just for letting this judge to know what he is judging about. He is not getting it. Damn!!
Print them on the back side of that paper that MS shipped to Europe.
What a horrible waste of paper. Rather, feed the records into a tool that turns them into a video stream. Apply a little pixelation so even if individual records can be reconstructed, they still can’t be recognized reliably by OCR.
It’s an interesting dilemma. Google claims they’re the vehicle, that the users are responsible. Viacom and courts want to know who those users are.
Now, let’s say the number of users are in the tens of thousands. Will Viacom sue each of them? Will Viacom pick a dozen scape-goats to make examples out of them?
It’s like the VCR, the “mix-tape”, etc. Technology is giving us something new, that lots of people do, and instead of embracing the technology they’re fighting it.
How long will it be until someone starts a “post a viacom video on Youtube” day, and a “flash mob” of people do that?
Send it all in big giant CAPTCHAs. Anti-OCR.
This kind of precedent is dangerous. Now if any large corporation thinks maybe it’s possible their copyrighted content has been made available elsewhere they have every right to everything about that “elsewhere”. Example: they *think* you pirated a couple of TV shows, they now have complete legal access to all past, present, and future emails as well as every keystroke you type or have typed on your computer. You now have ZERO privacy, all because they think you might have pirated a TV show.
@41:
Hey!
That’s a great idea!
Brilliant! Unfortunately, most U.S. jurisdictions require the data to be delivered in the way in which it’s kept, but it’s fun to think about. And maybe the case is being fought in one of the districts in which there’s still a loophole. Possibilities…
Just wait until they get to the discovery phase. Then Google’s goose is cooked. I’ll bet there are several megs worth of emails back and forth from the googler’s (unless they’ve destroyed them — which would be felonious in intself) about how they knew the copyrighted content was up on YouTube and knew exactly where it was.
If Viacom’s lucky, they may even find email from some Google exec cogitating on how they could monetize all of that illegal copyrighted content. God knows they can’t find any other way to make money from this albatross.
You don’t have to like Viacom, but 19’s right… Google stole, wholesale theft and not just clips, oftentimes entire movies. They knew exactly what was being posted — No safe harbor for yooz!
Google’s douchiness out-douches the most doucheful of the douches.
@Jacob
Too true. I honestly think they will have almost every person’s email who has ever used the internet.
While I find Viacom’s court battle valiant, they are fighting a losing war. Haven’t they learned anything from the fiasco of shutting down Napster? The music industry hasn’t been the same since. There will always be a way for the copyrighted material to appear on the net and for someone to copy it and repost it somewhere.
If you can’t beat ‘em, might as well join ‘em.
I can hear the environmentalists chiming in now.
@44, well if they want it how it is kept, send it to them on drives formatted with GFS, they store the files in GFS themselves.
Oh… And Google’s high-falutin argument that this is all about protecting its users privacy is so rhetorically turd-infused its a real knee-slapper.
Google’s the worst privacy violater on the planet, but not the only one by far… Your ISP has the data, as does every router in between you and YouTube. You click on a YouTube link, and there are probably dozens of companies who log that click.
You’d have to be a real ass-hat to think your YouTube “click” was tucked nicely and securely away in Google’s “privacy-vault (guffaw!).
Okay, we can save the trees. I like the floppy disc and faxing ideas, except that stacks of paper are so much more visually satisfying.
Anyone else know about the law requiring all trial documents to be delivered in electronic form that Andrew, @18, is talking about? Does a fax count?