<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google ordered to disclose viewing habits of Youtube users</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ablogaboutnothing.com/google-vs-viacom-youtube/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ablogaboutnothing.com/google-vs-viacom-youtube/</link>
	<description>No really, it's about nothing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 02:20:33 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Robert Barr</title>
		<link>http://www.ablogaboutnothing.com/google-vs-viacom-youtube/comment-page-1/#comment-9160</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Barr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 05:03:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ablogaboutnothing.com/?p=329#comment-9160</guid>
		<description>Brook,

Couple things:

1. I agree that Google isn&#039;t the culprit, but maintaining this info means that you have it. Which means you might have to produce it. Google already complies with local laws (see China)so once ordered, they will provide whatever records they maintain. My problem isn&#039;t even so much that they are giving it as it is to whom they are giving it to. 

I could understand if they were providing it to a government entity, but they are giving it to corporation, which is not part of Google&#039;s TOS.

2. I also agree that Viacom has no chance...problem is Google is already trying to work a deal to not provide certain information to Viacom, therefore Viacom doesn&#039;t have to win, Google just has to not want to loose.

3. I am a firm believer in protecting kids and defense obviously, problem is, these things always begin with the best intentions, then who knows! Besides, once you sacrifice personal privacy for security, you no longer have either (Ben Franklin).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brook,</p>
<p>Couple things:</p>
<p>1. I agree that Google isn&#8217;t the culprit, but maintaining this info means that you have it. Which means you might have to produce it. Google already complies with local laws (see China)so once ordered, they will provide whatever records they maintain. My problem isn&#8217;t even so much that they are giving it as it is to whom they are giving it to. </p>
<p>I could understand if they were providing it to a government entity, but they are giving it to corporation, which is not part of Google&#8217;s TOS.</p>
<p>2. I also agree that Viacom has no chance&#8230;problem is Google is already trying to work a deal to not provide certain information to Viacom, therefore Viacom doesn&#8217;t have to win, Google just has to not want to loose.</p>
<p>3. I am a firm believer in protecting kids and defense obviously, problem is, these things always begin with the best intentions, then who knows! Besides, once you sacrifice personal privacy for security, you no longer have either (Ben Franklin).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brook Durant</title>
		<link>http://www.ablogaboutnothing.com/google-vs-viacom-youtube/comment-page-1/#comment-9158</link>
		<dc:creator>Brook Durant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 02:03:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ablogaboutnothing.com/?p=329#comment-9158</guid>
		<description>Robert - I don&#039;t think we can blame Google for this. Sure we can blame them for even keeping records like that, but on the other hand there are certainly times when we&#039;d wonder why the hell they didn&#039;t have them. Child sex rings, national defense come to mind.

To be honest with you I don&#039;t think Viacom or anyone else has a chance in hell of succeeding. This is so much bigger than Google or Youtube or any one company/site. There will be some rough roads ahead for a lot of people while it gets sorted out, but ultimately this is one beast that isn&#039;t going to be slaughtered.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Robert &#8211; I don&#8217;t think we can blame Google for this. Sure we can blame them for even keeping records like that, but on the other hand there are certainly times when we&#8217;d wonder why the hell they didn&#8217;t have them. Child sex rings, national defense come to mind.</p>
<p>To be honest with you I don&#8217;t think Viacom or anyone else has a chance in hell of succeeding. This is so much bigger than Google or Youtube or any one company/site. There will be some rough roads ahead for a lot of people while it gets sorted out, but ultimately this is one beast that isn&#8217;t going to be slaughtered.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Barr</title>
		<link>http://www.ablogaboutnothing.com/google-vs-viacom-youtube/comment-page-1/#comment-9156</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Barr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 01:58:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ablogaboutnothing.com/?p=329#comment-9156</guid>
		<description>What is troubling is the ip address as well as the user id. There is no doubt they are going to go after heavy users, but this scares the Hell out of anyone who has an issue with privacy. 

Google has always maintained a level of respect (sort of) when it comes to privacy rights (save China) but this really is scary! Who hasn&#039;t posted a Youtube video on their site? I just did today. Do I know who owns the copyright? No. Am I sure someone does? Yes. Does that make me culpable? Probably!

I know I wouldn&#039;t want to pay to defend it!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is troubling is the ip address as well as the user id. There is no doubt they are going to go after heavy users, but this scares the Hell out of anyone who has an issue with privacy. </p>
<p>Google has always maintained a level of respect (sort of) when it comes to privacy rights (save China) but this really is scary! Who hasn&#8217;t posted a Youtube video on their site? I just did today. Do I know who owns the copyright? No. Am I sure someone does? Yes. Does that make me culpable? Probably!</p>
<p>I know I wouldn&#8217;t want to pay to defend it!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
