X
Business

Judge: Viacom gets 12TB of YouTube user data

A federal judge ordered (PDF) Google to hand over 12 terabytes of YouTube user data to Viacom, finding that the list of "login IDs" does not qualify as personally identifying information.In opposing Viacom's request for the information, Google had asserted users' privacy rights: "Plaintiffs would likely be able to determine the viewing and video uploading habits of YouTube’s users based on the user’s login ID and the user’s IP address.
Written by Richard Koman, Contributor

A federal judge ordered (PDF) Google to hand over 12 terabytes of YouTube user data to Viacom, finding that the list of "login IDs" does not qualify as personally identifying information.

In opposing Viacom's request for the information, Google had asserted users' privacy rights: "Plaintiffs would likely be able to determine the viewing and video uploading habits of YouTube’s users based on the user’s login ID and the user’s IP address.”

But the judge found the concerns speculative and waved in its face Google's own public defenses of collecting IP addresses:

We . . . are strong supporters of the idea that data protection laws should apply to any data that could identify you. The reality is though that in most cases, an IP address without additional information cannot.

EFF's Kurt Opsahl said Google should be protected under a federal law that protects video providers from having to turn over personally identifiable information.

"YouTube is a 'video tape service provider' under [the VPAA], because it is 'engaged in the business [of] delivery of ... audio-visual materials.' The VPPA protects 'personally identifiable information,' which is defined to include 'information which identifies a person as having requested or obtained specific video materials or services,'" Opsahl wrote. "This is exactly what is in the logging database."

The ruling only covers what materials the parties will have to turn over in the discovery portion of litigation; it is not a final decision on the merits.

Editorial standards