Time Odyssey

It was reported on Wired today that a judge has ruled, in the case of Viacom v. YouTube (Google), it is okay for online service providers to turn over lock, stock, and barrel all information related to the online activities of individuals. This includes personally identifying information which could subsequently be used for other litigation proceedings in so far as copyright infringement.

In his ruling Judge Louis Stanton granted 3 of Viacom’s 8 motions. Those being

1. Access to all videos removed by YouTube since it’s inception.
2. Access to all logs of videos watched including IP address and User Ids
3. Access to Google’s Video Schema which also connects to YouTube

What is disturbing about the ruling is a number of factors. The primary issue however is that there is no stated limitation in the terms of use of such information provided by Google to Viacom. That means there is no requirement for 3rd party verification of the disposal of such information once the purposes for which this information has been requested has been fulfilled. Essentially, Viacom can use any of the information however they choose to including the conducting of civil suits against individuals who upload copyright material similar to what the recording industry has been doing for some time.

While the judge ruled that access to an IP address and User Id does not, in of itself, constitute a break of someone’s privacy unless combined with other information, because there is no limitation of the terms of use of any information collected from YouTube, Viacom is free to do that data matching using other sources of data at their disposal.

For example, an IP address can allow someone to narrow down where that IP address physically resides by determining the sub-mask and range that it belongs to. You could narrow down to with a couple of blocks the exact neighbourhood the IP address belonged to. Using the IP address, subnet mask, and personal profile based on their YouTube ID, or even just the ID name itself, data matching could be done on anyone that has accessed a Viacom website or partner in order to uniquely identify who that person is.

The potential for mis-use of such information is far in excess of what the court has determined as part of its judgement. The fact that such a wide breadth of information has been made available, essentially with unrestricted use, as a legal precedence is something that should concern pretty much everyone. The problem is not just Viacom – its the fact that Viacom has cleared a path down a slippery slope that others with far less benign intentions will use to justify the erosion of personal privacy.

As the saying goes – the road to hell is paved with good intentions. – K