Thoughts on Data that Google Manages

01 August 2008 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

The use and evolution of the Internet has changed social behavior in a number of ways. It is unlikely that anyone could have foreseen the explosive growth and development of Google since it launched in 1998 and is now worth more than $200 billion. So when Google purchased YouTube there was a rumble about Google figuring out a way to commercialize and monetize YouTube in ways not contemplated. At the same time the copyright laws have been in turmoil over the Internet and it’s not clear who the real winner has been. The demise of Napster and song sharing in 2000 led the Apple’s unbelievable success with the iPod. Another unforeseen evolution of the Internet.

Recently a federal judge ordered Google to hand over 12 terabytes of YouTube data including IP addresses, and many privacy groups are fretting over which they should be. When YouTube visitors watch videos on YouTube they do not expect to be identified, and even though Viacom is suing Google for a $1 billion in copyright infringement that does not justify personal information to be disclosed. So the federal judge order the YouTube data to be subject to a protective order so that the data may not be used except for limited purposes. Since we are all aware of inadvertant mistakes and leaks of private information, any violation by Viacom, whether intentional or inadvertant, would put millions of individuals at risk. Watching these event unfold may lead to some changes in federal laws to protect individuals.

Few individuals review Privacy Policies on any websites, but the Federal Trade Commission requires that US companies follow whatever Privacy Policies that they have on their website. However, there are users of YouTube from other countries as there are not international boundaries for use and access of YouTube. In the EU (and Canada) there are very different privacy laws. Particularly the 1995 EU Data Directive which allows individuals access to any computer which has data about them which they can correct. The YouTube Privacy Policy states that YouTube agrees to the US Department of Commerce Safe Harbor Policy which means that YouTube complies with the 1995 EU Data Directive. So EU visitors to YouTube may have an entirely different perspective on the federal judge’s action last week regarding privacy of their use of YouTube’s data now being provided to Viacom.

 

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Authors

Related Services

Insights