Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Big Brothers Watching you

Author
Message
Anonymous User
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Feb 2008
Location:
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 13:14
Link
Quote: "What is "Tor"?"


Tor is an anonymity network that masks your IP through several different servers. Most field agents use it for communicating back to the government and other things like that.

???
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Chenak
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 14:18 Edited at: 5th Jul 2008 14:39
Link
Quote: "I'm pretty sure they can't turn around and legally sell it."


Oh yer it should definately be illegal though again I havent studied american law that much, but its tempting, millions of peoples data worth £15 each You'd have to think about it O.o. Well its an arbitary number, but information can be sold for certain.

Quote: "There's no privacy taken away now, there never was such a thing as 'privacy' on the internet, and that has been a logical conclusion for the past, what, seven years"


Doesn't viacom have your information right now? True they might not process it for years but they still have it. If they had your address and phone number on there won't you feel thats wrong? Have you entered your postcode on your youtube account?

Quote: "And BTW, get a grip, dude - Jeku is just stating the facts. Pretty obvious facts at that, too."


For the love of... look I know jeku is posting facts. I have a pretty firm grip thanks. English law prohibits English people from posting/obtaining/using personal data without your express permission on the internet! I know it doesn't apply outside the EU. I am not talking about IP addresses, things like addresses, phone numbers and email addresses. IP's are not counted as personal data apparently. http://www.out-law.com/page-7880

Quote: "Where'd you get that information? There is no right to privacy on the net."


Data protection act O.o

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/Acts1998/ukpga_19980029_en_1

If you want to read it, be my guest... It will cause you to go insane . It does state that my personal information should be protected (applies to physical AND digital data) but since the law only applies in the UK and the EU somewhat I know that internet privacy is never likely to happen.

Quote: "When I talk about privacy I don't mean a company selling your information without your authorization. "
AH ok. Storing IP's is OK since its difficult to associate it with a name and address. When I refer to privacy I only refer to personal data which would be your name, age, address, phone number etc

Just out of curiosity does this mean that for instance TGC could have a terms & conditions section and one clause of that section could include "If you visit our site we, the TGC shall own your soul!"

Quote: "We know what the situation is, but doesn't mean we have to agree that it's right and we discuss what right we should have."

Exactly
Back to top
Profile PM
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 15:01
Link
It seems that YouTube is a fan of privacy, unforunately nothing stopped Viacom from taking it from them:

Quote: "As you may have seen in the news, YouTube received a court order to produce viewing data from our database, including usernames and IP addresses. In order to protect our community's privacy, we strongly opposed this motion when Viacom and others filed it.
"


Hooray for stealing data.

"Experience never provides its judgments with true or strict universality; but only (through induction) with assumed and comparative universality." - Immanuel Kant
Back to top
Profile PM Website
tha_rami
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 19:55
Link
Quote: "Doesn't viacom have your information right now? True they might not process it for years but they still have it. If they had your address and phone number on there won't you feel thats wrong? Have you entered your postcode on your youtube account?"

Yes, they do. But since they can't do anything with it, and I did nothing wrong, why would I care? They also have my information at my favorite electronics retailer, and I don't care about that neither.

By entering your information and submitting the form, making an agreement, you agree to the rules as set forth by the License Agreement and the laws applicable to the site. I don't see anything morally wrong there.

I do agree, though, that information like that should not be SOLD.


A mod has been erased by your signature because it was larger than 600x120
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Mr Z
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2007
Location:
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 20:39
Link
Quote: "Google is not *selling* your IP address to Viacom. They're being forced to hand it over due to court order."


I was using it as an general example .


Quote: "Believe what you want. The truth and what you want are sometimes two polar opposites.

I love how some of you expect to go to a 3rd party website created by a *for-profit* company, and then expect to use their free services whichever way you want and by your own rules. Wake up.

And I'm not the leader of the Internet so don't blame me for this"


I do not sleep, I have a different view, a view that you then missinterpret. I say I "should" have the right for it, not that I believe I have it at the moment. Big difference .

Quote: "No, I don't deserve to have my privacy taken away, there is no such thing as privacy on the internet. The data is passed through numerous computers, nodes and the like before it reaches the computer where it needs to be, where it is in turn stored WITH YOUR consensus because you AGREED to use the site. IP logging is inherent to the internet, and you agree to that by USING the internet.

There's no privacy taken away now, there never was such a thing as 'privacy' on the internet, and that has been a logical conclusion for the past, what, seven years?

Thank god there's no such thing as that, too. The internet is a place with too much power and importance to let people roam around anonymously. It's the equivalent of going V for Vendetta style with masks, and what you get is Anarchy. Complete anarchy is a bad thing on a place like the internet - people need to be accountable for their acts both here and in real life - as far as there is a distinction, and come to think about it, there is no such thing as a distinction between those - only the fact that a website can be 'foreign soil' with 'foreign laws'.

And BTW, get a grip, dude - Jeku is just stating the facts. Pretty obvious facts at that, too."


What is and what should be are two different things. I do not say my IP is not logged now, I say that I may agree on it being logged, but that I should not have my personal information being sold to everyone with the right cash, or having it end up in a database over criminals for no other reason that I have an account on a site.

V for Vandetta, what happened was actually good in that situation. I do not fear "anarchy". "Anarchy" is sometimes a neccessary step, to gain order afterwards. As I stated there is a fine line between fighting crime and injustice, and creating a big brother system. I stand for making people accountable even over the net. There exist people who have been driven to suicide because of what people have done to them here. But I do not stand for creating a big brother system or creating a situation where the innocent are treated as potential criminals.

Quote: "I do agree, though, that information like that should not be SOLD."


Agreed.

Darkness, you haunt me. If I give in, I would be an monster beyond imagining. Light, you guide me. Thanks to you, I see past the nothingness. Life, I choose to live in the light.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Chenak
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 20:40
Link
Quote: "But since they can't do anything with it, and I did nothing wrong, why would I care?"


Exactly you didn't do anything wrong, yet they still have your data. I hear the "so what I did nothing wrong" statement a lot of times when issues of privacy, data protection and all that come up. I still find it worrying. Data can be lost, misused, stolen and a whole other amount of things.

If they were just required to send offending account information to then thats more acceptable, but google are apparently required to send all of it.
Back to top
Profile PM
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 20:41
Link
It seems the information you give YouTube don't want to have their user's privacy invaded, so I suppose Viacom went in and took it - frankly I don't think it's right that a governmental organisation should be able to do that - especially when a lot of the data won't even come from their country, it's just stored and handled there. We gave our data to Youtube and youtube only, not the US government. I've not done anything illegal on youtube, but because I'm clean doesn't mean I have to accept it. So there should be laws against governments obtaining data from websites without the permission of the owners unless they demonstrate illegal activity (say youtube find an illegal video and remove it, I'm sure it'd be fair for them to alert the right authorities of the user)

"Experience never provides its judgments with true or strict universality; but only (through induction) with assumed and comparative universality." - Immanuel Kant
Back to top
Profile PM Website
tha_rami
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 20:56
Link
You gave your data to Youtube, which in turn was forced to give it to the government since they are accountable by law - something you should've considered when you gave them your data when you signed up.


A mod has been erased by your signature because it was larger than 600x120
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 21:42
Link
I was under the impression British law would mean my data was protected regardless of what country it's in - obviously I was wrong on the factor and doesn't hold me from strength in the argument that such a law should exist in the USA and other countries. In the future if I need to use services I will only give data to UK companies and only give them the info I will be willing to give.

"Experience never provides its judgments with true or strict universality; but only (through induction) with assumed and comparative universality." - Immanuel Kant
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Chenak
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 22:08 Edited at: 5th Jul 2008 22:18
Link
Quote: "You gave your data to Youtube, which in turn was forced to give it to the government since they are accountable by law - something you should've considered when you gave them your data when you signed up."


Yes, to the government, the government then shouldn't have the right to pass all data to another company without reasonable cause. A load of potentially innocent people watching copyrighted videos is not reasonable cause to do this. They would have reasonable cause to force google into sending them relavent information to the government about everyone who was uploading illegal videos. However its all relative. Since companies are forcing on the people who watch the videos rather than who uploads them in the first place I'm not sure what american law constitutes as "reasonable cause"

Quote: "I was under the impression British law would mean my data was protected regardless of what country it's in"


Only if a UK organisation does it or anyone currently residing in the UK. If viacom went to BT and asked for my address and phone number then BT gave it to them I could then sue BT, if a law enforcement agency asked for the same details on behalf of viacom then that would be perfectly legal as long as they have sufficient cause. Its really unfortunate such laws are not available in many places. A DPA legislation was proposed in the US, but of course they swept it under the carpet.
Back to top
Profile PM
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 22:22
Link
Quote: "Data protection act O.o "


Well, YouTube is hosted and is owned by a California company. Whether your country has better privacy laws or not is irrelevant--- don't visit an American website if you think their privacy laws aren't adequate.

Quote: "Hooray for stealing data."


The court forced them to hand it over to Viacom based on US and California law. There was nothing stolen.

Quote: "so I suppose Viacom went in and took it - frankly I don't think it's right that a governmental organisation should be able to do that"


According to the RIAA, the MPAA, and US law, uploading copyrighted videos and music is illegal. Think of it like the FBI getting a warrant to hand over credit card data for people who buy pirated DVDs then searching their house. It's the same thing. Obviously a sane government has the right to investigate illegal activity, do they not?

Quote: "I was under the impression British law would mean my data was protected regardless of what country it's in"


How naive. If you browse a site from Afghanistan, Iraq, North Korea, etc. you think British law will make your logs safe? Under what authority? Reminds me of the movie with Clare Danes where she's thrown in a 3rd world country prison for drugs, and she's shouting "But I'm American! I'm American!" as if the police would give any credence to that.

Quote: "say youtube find an illegal video and remove it, I'm sure it'd be fair for them to alert the right authorities of the user"


Any simple browse of YouTube will find thousands of so-called "illegal" media, and I guess Viacom figures this is a good way to nab the worst offenders.

I highly, highly doubt they will pursue anyone outside of the US in the first place, so don't go shedding a tear. Different countries have different copyright laws, so even if they have your IP address it doesn't necessarily mean your world is going to end Just imagine the *billions* of logs--- that's every IP of every user who ever visited YouTube.


Back to top
Profile PM Website
bitJericho
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 22:36 Edited at: 5th Jul 2008 22:36
Link
Quote: "According to the RIAA, the MPAA, and US law, uploading copyrighted videos and music is illegal. Think of it like the FBI getting a warrant to hand over credit card data for people who buy pirated DVDs then searching their house. It's the same thing. Obviously a sane government has the right to investigate illegal activity, do they not?"


The difference is that Viacom is asking for all user data, those that committed illegal activities and those that didn't.


Hurray for teh logd!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Chenak
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 5th Jul 2008 23:00 Edited at: 5th Jul 2008 23:17
Link
Quote: "Well, YouTube is hosted and is owned by a California company. Whether your country has better privacy laws or not is irrelevant--- don't visit an American website if you think their privacy laws aren't adequate."


Its not irrelevant, I'm mearly stating how it works in England compared to the US and how its wrong personal data is being used this way overseas; and that there are people who are actually OK with it which is most confusing to me.

Quote: "The difference is that Viacom is asking for all user data, those that committed illegal activities and those that didn't."


Exactly.

Quote: "Any simple browse of YouTube will find thousands of so-called "illegal" media, and I guess Viacom figures this is a good way to nab the worst offenders."
Then they should force youtube to make their site more secure and get rid of copyrighted stuff easier. Viacom don't need to get their hands on public info. It would have been a million times easier to force google to fix the site, forcing them to send personal data seems dubious to me

Quote: "How naive. If you browse a site from Afghanistan, Iraq, North Korea, etc. you think British law will make your logs safe? Under what authority? Reminds me of the movie with Clare Danes where she's thrown in a 3rd world country prison for drugs, and she's shouting "But I'm American! I'm American!" as if the police would give any credence to that."


Actually we are somewhat protected, If I did not upload my real address to youtube they could spend some effort tracking me down with an IP address, then when they reach England they are subject to DPA laws. This means they would have to go to court and force the ISP or whatever to get my real address and the only way they could succeed is to provide actual evidence I have broken the law. Even then they should not be able to get my address as the case will be handled by a legitmate authority who will act on behalf of the company. The company would NEVER touch my data, at most they will know my name.

If I did upload my address then I would be screwed from the word go because I uploaded it on an american site under their laws.
Back to top
Profile PM
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 01:38 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 01:38
Link
Quote: "Any simple browse of YouTube will find thousands of so-called "illegal" media, and I guess Viacom figures this is a good way to nab the worst offenders."


Then wouldn't a simple browse be more efficient at filtering out illegal videos? Think how much less data they have to look at - Video-> User-> Other user videos -> Check User's Country -> Notify their authorities a job somebody at Google can be employed to do. Court order to obtain the personal data of many to me is not only invading privacy, but is completely unecessary.

On searching my favourite Bill Bailey clips I have found links to the full set of his comedy acts - all by the same user, so Youtube would go - right, this guy has copied One Bill Bailey DVD, oh look there's more - right you've broken copyright law. Finding a funny moment on the Nevermind the Buzzcocks where Preston walks out, oh look there's like 5 episodes by different users - right, I've got them.

Lets look through private data:

Seppuku, no illegal videos; tha_rami, no illegal videos; Chenak, no illegal videos, though the bunny rabbit is a bit suspicious...yawn, I hope I'm getting paid extra for this!


Quote: "How naive. If you browse a site from Afghanistan, Iraq, North Korea, etc. you think British law will make your logs safe?"


It's too easy to be naive on the internet - people will send data on website they think they can trust, youtube and google are just 2 of them. People tend to understand really only their laws as it's their laws they worry about day-to-day, I wonder out of the number of people that read the terms and conditions go, "Californian Law? hmm now what are the internet laws in California, lets research them".

Regardless, I still say it would be completely sensible if USA and other countries adopted a law on the protection of the data of internet companies, England catches pedophiles and pirates too without this crap about invading people's private data.

Otherwise, there should a human rights act or something on the nature of people's private data and how much can be given without notification and permission of the person first, unless of course there's evidence suggesting said person has broken the law of their country.

"Experience never provides its judgments with true or strict universality; but only (through induction) with assumed and comparative universality." - Immanuel Kant
Back to top
Profile PM Website
tha_rami
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 04:37
Link
Quote: "Actually we are somewhat protected, If I did not upload my real address to youtube they could spend some effort tracking me down with an IP address, then when they reach England they are subject to DPA laws. This means they would have to go to court and force the ISP or whatever to get my real address and the only way they could succeed is to provide actual evidence I have broken the law. Even then they should not be able to get my address as the case will be handled by a legitmate authority who will act on behalf of the company. The company would NEVER touch my data, at most they will know my name."

Which, in my opinion, is a bad thing. If I broke into a company's headquarters and stole a DVD from there, they'd also end up with all my data, and the internet should be no different. I'm extremely annoyed by this 'anonymous' attitude people appear to have on the internet.


A mod has been erased by your signature because it was larger than 600x120
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
ionstream
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2004
Location: Overweb
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 05:15
Link
Quote: "Seppuku, no illegal videos; tha_rami, no illegal videos; Chenak, no illegal videos, though the bunny rabbit is a bit suspicious...yawn, I hope I'm getting paid extra for this!"


It would have to be a pretty advanced script to desire to be paid!

Back to top
Profile PM Website
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 11:21 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 11:22
Link
Quote: "The difference is that Viacom is asking for all user data, those that committed illegal activities and those that didn't."


Well that's because they need to sort out the offenders from the non-offenders. It's not like the YouTube server logs are categorized "illegal" and "legal"

Quote: "and how its wrong personal data is being used this way overseas"


How is it wrong?

Quote: "It would have been a million times easier to force google to fix the site"


Wow, I'm surprised this is coming from someone on a "tech" website. Do you have any idea how literally impossible it would be to have an automated system that automatically determines if video is illegal? With today's technology that is *impossible*.

Quote: "Then wouldn't a simple browse be more efficient at filtering out illegal videos?"


A *simple* browse, eh? It would take thousands of years to simply "browse" YouTube and sniff out illegal material. There must be over a billion videos hosted there. Clearly nobody here understands what is impossible and what isn't.

Viacom will also not be able to comb through the logs manually, and it will be *impossible* for them to find every offender who ever uploaded or downloaded intellectual property owned by them--- but they obviously want to start somewhere.


Back to top
Profile PM Website
Mr Z
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2007
Location:
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 13:05
Link
Quote: "Which, in my opinion, is a bad thing. If I broke into a company's headquarters and stole a DVD from there, they'd also end up with all my data, and the internet should be no different. I'm extremely annoyed by this 'anonymous' attitude people appear to have on the internet."


I have that annoying attitude everywhere. Do not want every company I come across to know where I live, what my phone number is, who is my girlfriend, who I like to be with and so on. This is why I´m pretty annoyed at Visual Studio, because MS require that I register it to use it after 30 days, even the "free" version (but I have fortunetly found a way around that, and that way is not illegal at all, just a "bug" I´m using to skip it).

There is a difference between someone that steals a DVD and someone that just walks in the store to buy something. The ones that do not steal anything have nothing to do in a database over criminals. "Potential criminals" are not criminals, they are people that have not done anything.

Quote: "Well that's because they need to sort out the offenders from the non-offenders. It's not like the YouTube server logs are categorized "illegal" and "legal" "


YouTube can do that themselves, and then pass on the illegal materials. And if Viacom just has to do this, they should erase all legal data that they recieved from their memory. Besides, the question is how effective this really would be with bringing the people responsible for uploading illegal material to trial, especially considering that many of the people on YouTube are not even in the US. If they live in a country that consider filesharing legal, it would be impossible to get to them.

There is no greater virtue, then the ability to face oneself.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 13:47 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 13:49
Link
Quote: "Viacom will also not be able to comb through the logs manually, and it will be *impossible* for them to find every offender who ever uploaded or downloaded intellectual property owned by them--- but they obviously want to start somewhere.
"


Wouldn't it be just as simple as checking video data rather than personal data - then they can pick out the users from the list and chances are those users have more than one video and then you'd only need the data of the offenders to arrest them (if they're arrestable), thus leaving everybody else out of it. Whether they do it manually or with a script. Either way they're starting someway, except one way, they invade privacy uncessarily, which a lot of people are sensitive about in hope to filter out the pirates and the other only invades th privacy of the pirates, which will only involve their location so they can be investigated.

"Experience never provides its judgments with true or strict universality; but only (through induction) with assumed and comparative universality." - Immanuel Kant
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Deathead
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Oct 2006
Location:
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 14:48
Link
The only time I watch videos of episodes and stuff is when I missed a episode and didn't record it. I don't think that its majorly illegal.


Back to top
Profile PM Email
SunnyKatt
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Sep 2006
Location: USA
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 15:55 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 15:56
Link
You know, you can find peoples exact location with the IP address?

Go here, It starts with YOURS.

http://geotool.servehttp.com/


I wish the government had the time to go to all the pirates houses and fine them/arrest them/execute them.


Is this why the gov wants everyone's IP?

Favorite Quote: Dramatized code? Code Drama!

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Grandma
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Dec 2005
Location: Norway, Guiding the New World Order
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 16:08
Link
Quote: "You know, you can find peoples exact location with the IP address?"


That was far off. Like, another city off.

This message was brought to you by Grandma industries.

Making yesterdays games, today!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
RalphY
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: 404 (UK)
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 16:19
Link
Quote: "Which, in my opinion, is a bad thing. If I broke into a company's headquarters and stole a DVD from there, they'd also end up with all my data, and the internet should be no different. I'm extremely annoyed by this 'anonymous' attitude people appear to have on the internet."


Except I didn't break into anywhere or steal anything yet Viacom still has all my youtube viewing data now. I don't think anyone here has a problem with the idea of them being able to get data on people who have broken copyright laws as much as they do about them being able to get data on everyone without any evidence to suggest that they have broken the law beyond the fact they use youtube.

Oh boy! Sleep! That's when I'm a Viking! | Super Nintendo Chalmers!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Agent Dink
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Mar 2004
Location:
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 16:52
Link
Quote: "That was far off. Like, another city off. "


Yeah, same for me. Like an hour's drive away

MISoft Studios - Silver-Dawn

Back to top
Profile PM
monotonic
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Mar 2006
Location: Nottinghamshire, England
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 16:54
Link
Quote: "I'm extremely annoyed by this 'anonymous' attitude people appear to have on the internet"


You're annoyed because people want to keep their personal information private?


Quote: "If you think your privacy on the Internet is a personal right, then you have another thing coming"


Yes, you do have the right to privacy on the internet, it's just that the government doesn't think so. Just because the American government believe that they have a right to your personal info, doesn't mean that they are not infringing my personal rights.

My liver is evil, I must kill it!
Back to top
Profile PM
Chenak
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 17:16 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 17:26
Link
Quote: "Well that's because they need to sort out the offenders from the non-offenders. It's not like the YouTube server logs are categorized "illegal" and "legal""


Thats the job of a legitmate authority, not viacom.

Quote: "Wow, I'm surprised this is coming from someone on a "tech" website. Do you have any idea how literally impossible it would be to have an automated system that automatically determines if video is illegal? With today's technology that is *impossible*."


Did I say automated? no. I'm surprised you came to that conclusion.

Quote: "How is it wrong?"

How is it right? Whats your opinion on it specifically?

Quote: "Which, in my opinion, is a bad thing. If I broke into a company's headquarters and stole a DVD from there, they'd also end up with all my data, and the internet should be no different. I'm extremely annoyed by this 'anonymous' attitude people appear to have on the internet."


I imagine your data would be more secure in a government building than a random company building, could be wrong though. If you don't want your privacy on the internet be my guest. I don't want any more spam send to my home address, I get enough already thanks. I also don't want random threats from random companies take my information and assume I've watched some dodgy clips that were placed on you tube.

If you are against anonymous internet browsing then you are cool if I post your address up here right? Is that legal where you are? True its against forum rules, but all that could happen to me is I get banned for violating the terms & conditions which I agreed to when I signed up. If you were in the UK you could take me to court, if not tough luck. Just another example

Quote: "You know, you can find peoples exact location with the IP address? Go here, It starts with YOURS."


At least it managed to get my country right lol. Seriously IP tracking is more difficult than that... I hope
Back to top
Profile PM
Tom J
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Aug 2005
Location: Essex, England
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 17:36
Link
Quote: "I wish the government had the time to go to all the pirates houses and fine them/arrest them/execute them.
"


Execution is a bit over the top don't you think? Over here even murderers aren't put to death.

Back to top
Profile PM
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 17:48
Link
The fact is, in real life, you don't walk down the road with a billboard displaying your name, age, gender, address, phone number and other info......

Why should it be like that on the internet?

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Chenak
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 17:51
Link
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/07/court-ruling-will-expose-viewing-habits-youtube-us

Google are strong supporters of the DPA apparently. This article also states that this ruling is actually breaking federal law.
Back to top
Profile PM
Deathead
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Oct 2006
Location:
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 18:00
Link
Quote: "Over here even murderers aren't put to death."

Also over here, Murderers who get life are just there for 5 years.


Back to top
Profile PM Email
tha_rami
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 18:27 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 18:30
Link
Quote: "If you are against anonymous internet browsing then you are cool if I post your address up here right? Is that legal where you are? True its against forum rules, but all that could happen to me is I get banned for violating the terms & conditions which I agreed to when I signed up. If you were in the UK you could take me to court, if not tough luck. Just another example "

Exactly. And if you're interested in my personal data, you can find them by performing a whois on my domain (then scroll down to the whois part), just as you can on almost any website you whois nowadays. The internet is not a place for privacy. You've got privacy in your own house, as long as you do not use the internet, television, telephone or for that matter, any communication method.

They can track your phonecalls, are you aware of that? If someone does something criminal, they check all recent phone conversations to check for suspicious numbers. That's the same sort of thing, isn't it now? 'Potential criminals' must be monitored in order to get to 'actual criminals'.

Now, that Viacom is allowed to have that data through a legal procedure does ensure there is a goal to it, otherwise they'd not get that data. Not only that, but the viewing data can only be used to check for copyrighted materials. I can't care about that, nor can I care about G-mail (Google Mail for you Germans) analyzing my e-mail, search history for relevant ads.


A mod has been erased by your signature because it was larger than 600x120
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 18:33
Link
Quote: "You know, you can find peoples exact location with the IP address?"


It wasn't far off, at least they got my region right, so what if the place it told me where I live (in the middle of a field) is about an hour's drive away.


Anyway, so...it was our right to have our data protected, or at least from my understanding of what that article describes - there are laws in the USA that would have meant data should have been protected and what Viacom did isn't only morally wrong, but also wrong by Federal Law.

"Experience never provides its judgments with true or strict universality; but only (through induction) with assumed and comparative universality." - Immanuel Kant
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 18:35
Link
Quote: "And if you're interested in my personal data, you can find them by performing a whois on my domain (then scroll down to the whois part), just as you can on almost any website you whois nowadays."

How's that relevant to typical internet users?

Multisync - TCP Server/Client Multiplayer Plugin (DBP/DBCe)
Back to top
Profile PM Email
tha_rami
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 18:44 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 18:45
Link
Quote: "How's that relevant to typical internet users?"

If you visit a site, use a service, or want something done on the internet, you'll have to live with the idea that whatever company you sign up at, and all legalities that are relevant, will have access to the data as set forth in the whole agreement. A site has the right to log the IP addresses of its visitors, and to use that information to check for trends, or to report illegal activities. Then, on top, if the law decides that the license agreement is invalid, applicable law overrides any license agreement.

So, typical internet users are naive. Most of them are shocked to see 'whois'-data, and most of them aren't even aware any site hosted in the US is forced by law to have actual whois data present.

Privacy on the internet is a dream, or an utopian idea. It's like complaining about people watching you when running over street in your naked butt.


A mod has been erased by your signature because it was larger than 600x120
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
bitJericho
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 18:50
Link
Quote: "If you visit a site, use a service, or want something done on the internet, you'll have to live with the idea that whatever company you sign up at, and all legalities that are relevant, will have access to the data as set forth in the whole agreement."


I have no problem giving google my data, because they're awesome. I didn't give them my info so that Viacom could use it :/


Hurray for teh logd!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Little Bill
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Jun 2008
Location: UK
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 19:20
Link
Face it guys, if you want privacy in this world, you will have to go live in a cardboard box in the middle of the desert.

Back to top
Profile PM
Chenak
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 19:39 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 19:42
Link
Quote: "Exactly. And if you're interested in my personal data, you can find them by performing a whois on my domain (then scroll down to the whois part), just as you can on almost any website you whois nowadays. The internet is not a place for privacy. You've got privacy in your own house, as long as you do not use the internet, television, telephone or for that matter, any communication method."


I'm not entirely sure about this but doesn't whois only report details related to the location of the server the website is hosted on as well as the address of the person who registered it? Are you not required to purchase a domain in order for this information to be searchable? I can't get any of my personal details on their so I don't know what point you are trying to get across. I can get full addresses of peoples websites I've made, but its a business address so... yer. This is different because you have chosen to agree to post your information up there by registering the website, if the provider is not dodgy this would be mentioned in the terms and agreements when you register the thing. This means you concented to this which is perfectly legal.

Quote: "They can track your phonecalls, are you aware of that? If someone does something criminal, they check all recent phone conversations to check for suspicious numbers. That's the same sort of thing, isn't it now? 'Potential criminals' must be monitored in order to get to 'actual criminals'."


Exactly. They are not monitoring every single person, only "potential criminals", they would have some evidence to prove that this invasion of privacy is required. DPA also protects UK citizens from this.

Just to try and get my point of view clear. I'm all for google holding my information, their agreements and terms are close to the DPA and from the google blogs that they care about privacy of its users. Private information constitutes as information that can identify you, this could be your email, address, phone number or anything like that.

I am for the government forcing website owners to send them information regarding people who have openly broken the law on the website owners website, however most websites will disclose the information without to much protest as they may know these people have done illegal things.

I am completely against the government passing irrelevant personal information to a private company who may or may not use this information legitimately.

If viacom asked google for only the addresses of people uploading pirate stuff then there may not have been a court case at all. Fact is they wanted everything and google knew this was wrong so they fought for our privacy and they lost. Maybe viacom want to try to sue everyone who used youtube full stop.

Searching through all that information would take an impossible amount of time. At the very least maybe in a years time everyone who has used youtube will probably recieve one of those "warning" letters. You know similar to the UK tv license legal spam you get even if you have the bloody thing.
Back to top
Profile PM
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 19:46 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 19:52
Link
Quote: "you'll have to live with the idea that whatever company you sign up at, and all legalities that are relevant, will have access to the data as set forth in the whole agreement."


Well it seems the agreements have been broken anyway, as now it seems apparent that Viacom has gone against a specific act listed in the US law. So there are acts to protect our privacy, I knew about the one we have in the UK and now, despite what's been said, it seems now that there are Acts in the US as well. So despite what privacy protection we did have and Google's view against giving privacy away, has proven to be useless against Viacom.

Quote: "most of them aren't even aware any site hosted in the US is forced by law to have actual whois data present."


Then it seems obvious that awareness of what your activity and the intnernet needs to be emphasised, after all if people are unaware of what goes on and what can happen, it may seem naive, but only because they don't know what protects them and what doesn't - they place trust in big online companies as they would with big offline companies. And with Whois, not everybody on the internet owns a website, I do, but not everybody does.

Privacy online being a Utopia? No, not as long as they have the right laws in place, which some countries do. So if you're signing up to a British company, like TGC, then your data is safe from anybody else from obtaining that data - if TGC suddenly decided -

"Mr Seppuku here might be interested in different offers, his bank is this bank, so maybe he wants a savings account with a better bank, I'll give that bank his phone number, oh and he'll probably be interesting in some deals on some software to help his game creation, lets give his number out to these people without his permission" (Just as a likely example of what a company might want to do, sales calls are a pain in the rear and sometimes cause unecessary hassle)

It would go against the data protection act, as they're in the UK, I could sue. It's not a Utopia, it just takes some simple laws to be passed. Yeah your data will not be 100% safe, just like it doesn't mean you're not going to get stabbed because it's illegal, but at least you're comfortable in knowing there are procedures in place to keep you protected.

[Edit]

My information cannot be found on whois - neither seppuku-arts.co.nr or seppuku-arts.66ghz.com - it seems Chenak is right about that, so my information isn't so 'easy' to get a hold of, of course unless I register a domain name, which I'm sure in the terms and conditions it will mentions something about the availibility of your information - or at least I'd expect such information would be availible so that the person signing up isn't blind to what they're doing.

"Experience never provides its judgments with true or strict universality; but only (through induction) with assumed and comparative universality." - Immanuel Kant
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 19:54 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 19:55
Link
Quote: "Privacy on the internet is a dream, or an utopian idea."

If you're explicitly entering your details on a site, then yes. You can't track someone by their IP address. Not unless the ISP discloses private information at least.

Multisync - TCP Server/Client Multiplayer Plugin (DBP/DBCe)
Back to top
Profile PM Email
bitJericho
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 20:28
Link
Quote: "So despite what privacy protection we did have and Google's view against giving privacy away, has proven to be useless against Viacom."


The case isn't over yet. I'm sure google will be fighting the ruling.


Hurray for teh logd!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
tha_rami
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 21:14
Link
Quote: "I'm not entirely sure about this but doesn't whois only report details related to the location of the server the website is hosted on as well as the address of the person who registered it? Are you not required to purchase a domain in order for this information to be searchable? I can't get any of my personal details on their so I don't know what point you are trying to get across. I can get full addresses of peoples websites I've made, but its a business address so... yer. This is different because you have chosen to agree to post your information up there by registering the website, if the provider is not dodgy this would be mentioned in the terms and agreements when you register the thing. This means you concented to this which is perfectly legal."

Exactly. Perfectly legal. Now, I'm quite amused that what you're going in against is a perfectly legal order.

In any case, I was just trying to drag this discussion a bit to see if any good points came up. It appears this discussion is at its end now, so I'll go and join Chenak/Seppuku: if the government or any governmental/legal instance requires information on illegal activities, they should be able to get it from any website, and they can. Companies should not have access to information stored by other companies, and should instead ask for any governmental/legal instance to carry out such an investigation for them.


A mod has been erased by your signature because it was larger than 600x120
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 21:15
Link
Quote: "even the "free" version"


Hehe I have no problem giving my email up for the free version--- that used to cost me $300 Also, nothing's stopping you from creating a dummy Hotmail account for the registration.

Quote: "Wouldn't it be just as simple as checking video data rather than personal data - then they can pick out the users from the list and chances are those users have more than one video and then you'd only need the data of the offenders to arrest them"


Hence the reason Google didn't want to hand it over in the first place. Google obviously understands the implications of handing over so much data.

Quote: "Yes, you do have the right to privacy on the internet, it's just that the government doesn't think so."


Your personal rights are dictated by your government, not you as a human being. You do not inherantly have privacy "rights" on the Internet any more than you do as a human being. Your country may give you personal freedoms, but that is dictated solely by your government.

Quote: "Did I say automated? no. I'm surprised you came to that conclusion."


Well then that's even *more* extreme and *more* far-fetched to have humans manually sifting through the videos. Do you even have any idea how many videos are uploaded on YouTube every second? YouTube would not be around today if they had mods previewing every video.

And then again--- how would a human being know if something is copyrighted? If he heard The Who on a video, sure, that's pretty obvious. But there are millions of obscure bands and TV shows, movies and it would be severely *more* impossible for humans to manually sift through the videos. Just sit down with a pen and paper and do the math

Quote: "How is it right? Whats your opinion on it specifically?"


Let's see--- the court ordered the logs to be handed over to Viacom. Technically, under law, that is not *wrong*. If the police get a search warrant to search your house because they suspect you of having a drug lab, nobody sane would say that it's "wrong" if there's ample evidence. Any joe blow can go to YouTube and find coyrighted material in seconds, so there's more than enough evidence for the courts to do some kind of action.

Quote: "If you are against anonymous internet browsing then you are cool if I post your address up here right? Is that legal where you are?"


An IP address is different than a home address (as I'm assuming you're talking about). If you're not smart enough to keep your personal data (credit card numbers, home address, etc.) from being on the Internet, then you can't expect the "Internet police" to keep you safe.

Quote: "That was far off. Like, another city off."


Your IP address is tied to a specific ISP, and that ISP only. All the authorities would need is to contact the ISP and have them hand over your details based on the IP address.

Quote: "This article also states that this ruling is actually breaking federal law. "


Well then let the courts sort it out. None of us in this thread are lawyers, I assume.


Back to top
Profile PM Website
Mr Z
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2007
Location:
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 21:21 Edited at: 6th Jul 2008 21:29
Link
Quote: "They can track your phonecalls, are you aware of that? If someone does something criminal, they check all recent phone conversations to check for suspicious numbers. That's the same sort of thing, isn't it now? 'Potential criminals' must be monitored in order to get to 'actual criminals'."


Problem is when everyone is considered a "potential criminal".

Quote: "Hehe I have no problem giving my email up for the free version--- that used to cost me $300 Also, nothing's stopping you from creating a dummy Hotmail account for the registration."


What I reacted on was that I had to activate it to use it, even if it was supposed to be free. But I found a way around it, so it does not matter that much now.

There is no greater virtue, then the ability to face oneself.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
MSon
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Jul 2004
Location: Earth, (I Think).
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 21:34
Link
There are certain programmes which you can download which if you can get them installed on a mobile, then they will record calls and text messages, along with the Numbers they where to/from, just like tapping a land line.

Does anyone remember the Skype Mobile which had a built in lye detector, dont think they sold that many, but that shows what you can do with a mobile.

Everyone Be Cool, You, Be Cool.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Chenak
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 6th Jul 2008 21:39
Link
Quote: "Well then that's even *more* extreme and *more* far-fetched to have humans manually sifting through the videos. Do you even have any idea how many videos are uploaded on YouTube every second? YouTube would not be around today if they had mods previewing every video.

And then again--- how would a human being know if something is copyrighted? If he heard The Who on a video, sure, that's pretty obvious. But there are millions of obscure bands and TV shows, movies and it would be severely *more* impossible for humans to manually sift through the videos. Just sit down with a pen and paper and do the math"


Then you agree that it is impossible for viacom to actually use this data since they can never track all those people who have commited these crimes? Can't have it both ways. If it is impossible for youtube to filter all the pirate stuff by hand then it is equally impossible that viacom to do the same. So why the hell did they get data if it is impossible to go through it all to prosecute the people who have violated the law.

Sure there will be a lot more videos than users, but they have to search through millions of people, and for each person search for every single video they've seen, then watch all of those themselves to see if it is copyrighted assuming that most are not given a meaningful name, this is an insane amount of processing. Is this correct?

A verification method similar to the one we have on TGC purchases is the only way to protect them from a majority of copyrighted videos, sending information to viacom does NOT prevent copyrighted videos from being uploaded.

Quote: "the court ordered the logs to be handed over to Viacom. Technically, under law, that is not *wrong*"


It is if it breaks another laws. But you are right, its for the courts to sort out.

Quote: "If the police get a search warrant to search your house because they suspect you of having a drug lab, nobody sane would say that it's "wrong" if there's ample evidence. Any joe blow can go to YouTube and find coyrighted material in seconds, so there's more than enough evidence for the courts to do some kind of action."


I believe someone would say thats wrong if there was no evidence against those particular people. Again law enforcement agencies would have done some work to locate a suspect or group of subjects then search their houses, they do NOT raid the entire town and search every single house if there is evidence that one or two people are dealing drugs. Its overkill, and not cost effective and completely unnecesary.
Back to top
Profile PM
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 7th Jul 2008 01:39
Link
Quote: "under law, that is not *wrong*."


This is probably where where we're on different pages - you are talking about what is right be law and what is entitled, we're talking about what is morally right and what should be entitled - or at least from our point of view. Just because it's the law, don't make it moral, even US or UK law may not necessarily be moral.

Regardless, it seems Viacom and the court did was wrong by law anyway - under the act highlighted in the article Chenak posted they would not have been allowed to take that data - or at the very least, some of it.

Quote: "If the police get a search warrant to search your house because they suspect you of having a drug lab, nobody sane would say that it's "wrong" if there's ample evidence. Any joe blow can go to YouTube and find coyrighted material in seconds, so there's more than enough evidence for the courts to do some kind of action."


If they have evidence to suggest I have used Youtube illegally, then I can see why there would be a warrant given to access my data, but this is different, this is a search warrant on everybody's data because crime is in the neighbourhood. As from what I see Viacom has got a 'search warrant on my house' without evidence, which is wrong.


Quote: "All the authorities would need is to contact the ISP and have them hand over your details based on the IP address"


In this country, they'd need the evidence before they could even obtain that information, because if my ISP just simply gave that information because a man in blue game knocking at their door, then I could sue them for misuse of my data and for breaching the DPA. Like we've said this DPA is an actual law that makes sense - you can't investigate a crime without the evidence, so companies can keep your information locked up until the authorities have something against you that stands strong enough for an investigation. So a law that makes sense, well not often I kudos our legal system in the UK.

"Experience never provides its judgments with true or strict universality; but only (through induction) with assumed and comparative universality." - Immanuel Kant
Back to top
Profile PM Website
SunnyKatt
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Sep 2006
Location: USA
Posted: 7th Jul 2008 03:22
Link
So maybe the TGC server is not inside of a creepy van... darn.

Favorite Quote: Dramatized code? Code Drama!

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 7th Jul 2008 07:57
Link
Quote: "In this country, they'd need the evidence before they could even obtain that information"


I'm talking technically, not legally Technically all they need to find you is to get the info from your ISP. Legally they'd need evidence of course (and that's the same in this country too).


Back to top
Profile PM Website
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 7th Jul 2008 12:09
Link
Quote: "Quote: "In this country, they'd need the evidence before they could even obtain that information"

I'm talking technically, not legally Technically all they need to find you is to get the info from your ISP. Legally they'd need evidence of course (and that's the same in this country too)."


Well, fair enough.

"Experience never provides its judgments with true or strict universality; but only (through induction) with assumed and comparative universality." - Immanuel Kant
Back to top
Profile PM Website
MSon
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Jul 2004
Location: Earth, (I Think).
Posted: 7th Jul 2008 12:51
Link
Theres better things police and courts should be doing rather than chasing all this nonsence for companies, in our local paper today, front page is a story on how some Teachers and Nurses are being provided with AntiStab vests from the goverment due to huge increases in random stabbings, there was even reports of some Shop Workers and even Vickers being issued with them, but then again the law in the UK has pritty much gone to pot.

I reported a crime a few weeks ago, initally the police "Lost" the crime Report so we had to report it again, that was about 3/4 weeks ago, and where still waiting for our Guaranteed Visit, initally they kept changing the "Appointment", then just never bothered to contact us, i beleave the excuse the police used when dialing 999 was "Sorry but theres not enouth police officers to chase this, Please Wait a few days", kind of annoying how they manage to chase up all this nonsence enquiries for companies when they cant take a simple statement from a tax payer due to "Lack Of Time".

Everyone Be Cool, You, Be Cool.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-20 12:33:33
Your offset time is: 2024-11-20 12:33:33