RSSAngry YouTube users boycott, Viacom seems to respond
By Jacqueline Emigh | Published July 8, 2008, 6:23 PM
Enraged YouTube users are protesting a controversial court ruling last week by uploading homemade "Viacom sucks" videos, and calling for mass boycotts of Viacom entertainment vehicles such as Paramount Pictures and MTV.
"Boycott Viacom! Fight back for your privacy rights!" proclaimed one video found by BetaNews on the YouTube site early this evening.
"Don't let Viacom wipe [out] the Constitution on Independence Day!" urged another, which hadn't been taken down either by YouTube or the user who created it.
As we reported last week, a lot of YouTube users -- along with privacy advocacy groups purporting to speak on their behalf -- are very unhappy indeed over a ruling issued in US District Court for Southern New York last Wednesday. There, Judge Louis Stanton ordered Google to turn over to Viacom a log containing the user login IDs and IP addresses of sources from which videos were downloaded, together with details about those videos.
Over the long Fourth of July weekend and afterward, YouTube users took the opportunity to consistently refresh YouTube's growing cache of anti-Viacom content, with materials that include new videos exhorting users to band together in a boycott covering Viacom's Web site, Paramount films (including the new Indiana Jones film that premiered in May), MTV cable networks, and other Viacom-owned properties.
"Viacom has not asked for and will not be obtaining any personally identifiable information of any YouTube user," reads a posting that has meanwhile popped up on Viacom's site.
"The personally identifiable information that YouTube collects from its users will be stripped from the data before it is transferred to Viacom," according to the post, which seems to try to transfer user disgruntlement from Viacom over to YouTube. "Viacom will be using the data exclusively for the purpose of proving our case against YouTube and Google."
Yet in a quick search of YouTube on Tuesday evening, BetaNews counted a total of 4,260 videos indexed under the search term "Viacom," with 175 of those under "Viacom sucks."
Although we didn't check precisely how many of those Viacom-oriented videos were newly uploaded, the roughly 200 entries under "Viacom boycott" were apparently posted since the issuance of Judge Stanton's ruling last week.
Some of these videos link to a "Boycott Viacom" Web site at BoycottViacom.blogspot.com. The site claims to have corporate sponsorship from organizations that include McDonalds Corporate Responsibility, FreeCreditReport.com, and the World Wildlife Fund, although this sponsorship information has not been confirmed.
Viacom's case centers upon allegations from Viacom that YouTube and its owner Google are guilty of massive copyright infringement for allegedly allowing unauthorized viewing of move clips and soccer highlights.
For YouTube users who are downloading videos from behind network routers or corporate gateways -- and there are untold numbers of them out there -- the IP address refers to the gateway rather than to a specific PC. Moreover, only those users with registered YouTube accounts have login IDs. If you want to download video from YouTube, it isn't even necessary to sign up for an account. But you do need a YouTube account if you want to do such things as upload or comment on videos, or keep track of favorites you've viewed before.
Could the YouTube users' protests be working already? "Viacom has been in discussions with Google to develop a framework to share [user] data," Viacom now says in a statement on its Web site. "We are committed to a process that will not only comply with the Court's confidentiality order, but that will also meet our strongest possible Internet privacy protections."
I don't think Viacom has fully read the YouTube End-User licence. YouTube clearly states that they will protect our user data. Viacom does not have the right to obtain our personal information and does not have the right to look at what we have been watching. If they do look at our user data, Viacom themselves will be breaking the Privacy Policy law. I as a YouTube user feel safe under the YouTube End-User licence, and I am not scared that Viacom will lay a finger on my data because I know they will not.
Score: 0
|Why is everyone angry with just Viacom. Shouldnt they target Google and Youtube for amassing user information? Does it really make a difference who has the data?
If you are not angry with Google, then why should be angry with Viacom. Google targeted ads based on this information, and since they generated revenue from Viacom's products, Viacom has first rights, not Google.
If you want to boycott, then youtube should also be included in the list.
PS: I am against gathering any kind of user information.
Score: 0
|It is called INFORMATION MINING and it is illegal and unethical. They aren't worried about copyright violation and everyone around the world knows this.
They are seeking to profile those 'subversive' 'anti-bush' (notice I didn't say Anti-American) or anything that this fascist government working with their crook buddies at ViolationCom want to profile and target individuals. If not for removal or 'control' then to target market them - which is Billions of FREE Marketing information they DIDN'T pay for and NO ONE agreed too that is a 'registered' member of YouTube.
The entire idea was freedom of ideas and sharing, though Viacom and our Government thinks we should just be entertained watching dogs skateboard and arguing over creationism.
Have you noticed there isn't a Single F#$% ViaCom video ANYWHERE in the top lists AFTER Tuesday?
Have you noticed that there isn't a SINGLE comment that is allowed with the words "viacom and F*)#" in it.
Ah... so I buy your story about as much as I do Bush's legitimacy as an elected president, and considering the Censorship is ALREADY In PLACE... I think the writing in crayon on the wall couldn't be more obvious and your BS Pro-Bush/Villacom 'you are all safe' story is about as believable as Pelosi gives a Sh#$ about the people = NOT!
I think it is a very real fear to have your mouth shut for you and be told what you can say and can't say while being constantly lied too by the people whom we entrusted our lives and our future. What a disgraceful pack of thieves and crooks. If there were a God - Viacom would burn to the ground along with Bush's Empire.
Then I'll feel safe again. Thanks.
Score: 0
|lmao..
Someone missed his meds.
Score: 0
|No I believe this goes beyond Viacom trying to get back in the publics good gracies. This was going to come from someone now that it has A posterchild (Viacom) We must go to the point of huge economic loss for this company. I'm not mean and I don't do blogs in my pajama's late at night with 5 cats around me. This has to take on the effect of littigation. Make this such A catoustrphic event for Viacom it will be years before any company even think's about doing it again if at all. For this boycott to work it must go on and on and on. No matter what the company does to right it. This has to become litterally the 3rd rail for such company's. You step on it and you die.
Score: 0
|The Sad and Tragic truth however is that PELSOI will hand it right over to them like the Biblical wh*** she is. It will never see a protest - those people will be classified as 'subversive' and 'home grown terrorist' and dealt with as we have no rights anymore.
It is all Double Plus Ungood.
Score: 0
|HA HA punks i dont care
Score: 0
|What has Viacom done for me? Destroyed MTV, destroyed VH1, sucked up Comedy Central, cancelled Jericho and Moonlight on CBS, and now they want to sue youtube out of existence. Oh, and they won't let Don Geronimo stream his radio show from Ocean City, MD due to a 2-year non-compete. I'm all for a systemic boycott.
Score: 0
|Fack viacom . . !!!!!!!!!
viva la FREEDOM !!!!!!!!!
Score: 0
|Geesh.
Yet ANOTHER target for the self-entitled crowd to vent their frustration that the OWNERS of material object to the theft and unauthorized use of others' material.
The nerve of some folks.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!
Score: 0
|"the OWNERS of material object to the theft and unauthorized use of others' material."
Other companies didn't sue. They exercised reason, demonstrated that they (at least sort of) understand how "new media" works and signed distribution agreements with YouTube.
Anyway, you want to talk about "entitlement?" Viacom decides it's "entitled" to (mythical) "lost revenues" and decides to sue -- instead of realizing what any half-brained monkey knows: YouTube video views =/= lost revenue. Quite the opposite -- generate enough views and you generate legitimate hype.
Viacom is just another example of a spoiled-brat company who won't play by new rules. They *can* make money off this Intarweb thing, but they choose to cling to an outmoded business model. Viacom would rather drag companies, and be dragged itself, kicking and screaming out of the sandbox by the hair.
Score: 0
|Viacom is just another example of a spoiled-brat company who won't play by new rules.
Rules? You mean like Copyright? Or are you just making these "new rules" up as you go?
They *can* make money off this Intarweb thing, but they choose to cling to an outmoded business model. Viacom would rather drag companies, and be dragged itself, kicking and screaming out of the sandbox by the hair.
It's this thing called freedom. They do not have to enter any market or business model they do not wish to. That's one of the great things about running a business. It's yours. You decide how it's run. Not your "alleged" customers.
Score: 0
|I'm kinda surprised nobody has been talking about recalling Judge Stanton (if that can even be done in NY). He signed the order and he *must* have known that user information shouldn't be released en-masse just so Viacom could go on a fishing expedition. Viacom never even had to show probable cause that a crime has been committed. Shame on him. Do we really want that kind of privacy-stripping Judge on the bench?
Score: 0
|God dam, what a world we live in ruled by the £ and $
Score: 0
|lol, so true.
Score: 0
|Surprised noone has suggested firing up AVG with LinkScanner enabled and visiting site and letting it loose en mass.
Score: 0
|@Galway
Funniest thing I've read this week...
Score: 0
|yea the main question is Will they follow though on what they say or will they suddenly change their mind if they loose their case... Its happened before and may well happen again.
Score: 0
|As far as I can tell, the site BoycottViacom.blogspot.com does not claim "to have corporate sponsorship from organizations that include McDonalds ..." as you write. It claims that Viacom has sponsorship from those organisations.
Score: 0
|The problem with this case is that nobody was breaking any clear-cut laws when they first uploaded their videos. This is retroactive enforcement, which I'd wager is probably unconstitutional.
Score: 0
|DMCA? Reasonably clear cut, I'd say.
Score: 0
|Viacom needs to get a life.
Score: 0
|Video clips and even whole shows uploaded and watched by YouTube fans would only PROMOTE Viacom's interests by generating the kind of buzz and interest viewing a show normally generates. Yes, there is a certain loss of commercial ad revenue, but if you are bringing in more viewers to new shows by allowing them to see old ones, I don't see that it's a bad thing.
What I see here is an entertainment company who's not interested in entertaining anyone ever again.
Score: 0
|They canned MTV-X, I still hate them for that.
I mean on top of all the other reasons for them sucking.
Score: 0
|...and since when did MTV cease to stand for Music Television? I still hate them for that. They could have introduced a completely separate channel devoted to all the crap they show on that network now, and left the original alone.
Score: 0
|I couldn't agree more with that.
Score: 0
|it's not MTV anymore, it's NTV.
Score: 0
|I'm in. I will not get any product or watch anything that comes from Viacom from now on.
If Viacom is going to be the next RIAA, they can look at where the RIAA is now, the users drown them.
Score: 0
|It's about time we make some new laws that attack companies like Viacom, which attack our privacy. A simple boycott isn't good enough, as too many people don't know all of Viacom's products.
Perhaps something like six months in jail for every person's identity compromised would be sufficient deterrent. Perhaps the jail terms to be for employees who participated, or approved, the identity compromise, starting with the lawyers.
Score: 0
|TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU CANORO
IM DOING THE SAME AND SPREADING THE WORD
Score: 0
|