Article printed from SiteProNews: http://www.sitepronews.com
  HTML version available at: http://www.sitepronews.com/archives.html

Court Orders Google to Turn Over YouTube Data
By Donald P. Schweitzer (c) 2008

A federal court has ordered the giant of all Internet
companies - Google, to hand over documents concerning
YouTube's viewing data to another media monster - Viacom.
Viacom and Google are currently entangled in a no-holds
barred lawsuit, concerning allegations of infringement of
intellectual property rights. Viacom wanted the viewing
data to help it determine the extent to which YouTube's
success was built on the popularity of copyrighted clips
that were illegally posted to the site. Google contended
that YouTube's viewing data should be kept from Viacom to
protect the privacy of its users.

Unfortunately for the millions of people who view YouTube
videos, the judge granted Viacom's request. The court's
ruling has caused many advocates of privacy rights to cry
foul. For the following reasons, I believe the federal
judge was correct in ruling against Google.

The Court's Powers To Access Records Cannot Be Denied.

Like millions of Americans and other people around the
world I love Google. I can say without a doubt that Google
has been very good to me and my family law practice. And
if Google wants to be viewed by it's customers as the
champion of privacy rights, so be it. But, let's get real
. . . , the court's access to private records under
appropriate circumstances cannot be denied. We cannot let
people hide behind their computers to commit crimes or
torts. It would be absurd, for example, to give a child
molester safe haven to either post or view child
pornography. It would be equally absurd to give a person
safe haven to infringe upon the property rights of another,
to commit defamation of character, or to violate someone's
privacy rights

No Right Is Absolute!

The fact that the federal court did not buy into Google's
privacy right argument comes as no surprise to those of us
who go to court for a living and who know that the right of
privacy is not absolute. Our courts are vested with the
power to issue search warrants and subpoenas to allow
lawyers access to private records. On every work day
throughout America, judges are granting motions similar to
the one filed by Viacom.

Within my family law practice, for example, I serve
subpoenas for personal and employment records almost on a
daily basis. Personal records frequently lead to hard
evidence concerning the opposing party's true income for
the purpose of paying child and spousal support. Likewise,
data collected from the opposing party's computer usage can
also lead to damaging evidence concerning the issues of
child custody, community property, or domestic violence.
Thank goodness for those incriminating little e-mails.
There is nothing like cross examining a perpetrator of
domestic violence as to why he thought it was necessary to
send 40 messages to my client concerning her new boyfriend!

In case this information is beginning to scare you, keep in
mind that our legal system allows parties the right to
object to invasions of their privacy. In California, for
example, before a subpoena for personal or employment
records can be served, the attorney serving the subpoena
must give notice to the opposing party and wait numerous
days before sending the subpoena out for service. In
addition, there are special rules when it comes to any
attempt to obtain medical records, in which case the court
is usually going to scrutinize the request for said
documents. So if your ex is trying to get your phone
records to obtain your friend's phone numbers, there are
certain hurdles that need to be cleared before the court
will release such records.

Can you say . . . , "protective order?"

There is nothing new about the possibilities of an attorney
or party releasing confidential information. In the cruel
world we live in, people misbehave and private information
is often dispensed to people who have no right to the
records. I'm sorry if I've just burst your bubble, but
this happens all the time, especially in divorce cases.

Fortunately, the court has a pretty strong remedy to this
problem. Courts issue "protective orders" that forbid the
release of private documents to third parties and impose
huge sanctions on people for violating such orders. And
let us not forget the fact that an attorney's license could
be in serious jeopardy for intentionally releasing such
information, which is a pretty strong incentive for not
violating the court's order.

Again, borrowing from my experience in litigating family
law cases, I often find it necessary to obtain protective
orders on behalf of my clients. In one case, where my
client was an attorney who owned his own law practice, his
wife demanded copies of all the records pertaining to his
clients' files. She purportedly wanted the records to
assist her forensic accountant in determining the value and
cash flow of his law practice. Obviously my client was
concerned about the confidentiality of his client's files,
especially since his wife was on the war path to destroy
him. We could not get into court quick enough to obtain a
protective order, which was granted without hesitation!

What About Viacom's Underlying Motives?

For the purpose of this discussion, Viacom's motives are
irrelevant. Viacom has the right to our system of justice
as any other company or person. It is, after all, the
court's responsibility to ensure that Viacom does not
release the information to third parties. If Viacom
violates the court's protective orders, well, look out for
an astronomical monetary sanction.

Be Careful!

The bottom line is that the information obtained by Viacom
will be safeguarded by a protective order restricting
access to the data to outside lawyers or others. The
lawyers representing Viacom will probably make sure the
protective order is obeyed. Nevertheless, it behooves all
of us to think twice about the sites we choose to view
within the privacy of our homes. After all, the right to
privacy is not absolute, and you never know who may get
their hands on your records.
===========================================================
Written by Donald P. Schweitzer
Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer
201 South Lake Avenue, Suite 700, Pasadena, California 91101
(626) 683-8113 http://www.PasadenaLawOffice.com
===========================================================

Copyright © 2008 Jayde Online, Inc.  All Rights Reserved.

SiteProNews is a registered service mark of Jayde Online, Inc.