It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Google must divulge YouTube log

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:
sty

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 07:53 PM
link   
this is sick! They simply want to know who is watching the conspiracy videos! If they would be concerned on copyright they would ask details about the posters not about the watchers! You cannot blame someone for watching a TV program or a YouTube video, all they really want to know is what you are doing out there!




posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ZindoDoone
 


i know , i always read the small print
there is always a small clause which says dont use my details for such purpose.
but that clause is micro so its very easy to miss. guess thats how they get people.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Just boycott viacom and send those bastards a message or better yet inundate them with emails letting them Know how you feel. I am usually hard pressed to find decent programming (great word isn't it) these days anyway.

[edit on 7/3/2008 by liamoohay]



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 09:16 PM
link   
What are they going to sue the people that watched the videos now? Can this turn out like the record company internet sharing ordeal that happened a few years ago?
Another thing to think about is, with this ruling will government agencies and local police departments use youtube as a baiting tool?



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul
The EFF nutters are going overboard now,
first they get (trying to get ISPs to monitor everything that their users are doing)

now they want details of everyone that watches Youtube to be given to them.

an example over an ISP is virgin which has officialy said they are on the side of the EFF and not the consumers.


Bodrul, doesn't it say that the Electronic Frontier Foundation is arguing against the ruling, and therefore supporting our privacy?



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 11:03 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 11:22 PM
link   
So let me see if I've got this right...

A federal judge just ordered Google to surrender:

- location details of millions of viewers
- viewing time preferences of millions of viewers
- complete, ranked content preferences of millions of viewers
- demographic profiles of all registered viewers (who bothered to fill in the profile)

That kind of in-depth market research would cost tens of millions of dollars - and may well be the most complete database of it's kind, ever.

Someone, please check that Judge for kickback money.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by vox2442
 


If you like that, then you'll love the Department of Homeland Security's comprehensive database. Google "maincore" and then tell us what you think.



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by sty
this is sick! They simply want to know who is watching the conspiracy videos! I


That was my first thought too! To be honest, it wouldn't surprise me at all if that is the REAL reason why they are doing it. I personally watch a lot and I mean a lot of conspiracy videos on youtube about the bush's involvement with the kennedy's assassinations, 911, alex jones videos etc. And I add them to my favorites, but mysteriously, the videos seem to be in violation etc and get deleted.

Obviously the government doesn't want people to think about the stuff that alex jones etc puts out. They don't want us to know the truth.



[edit on 7/4/2008 by no_pulse]



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 03:37 AM
link   
Wow, I'm starting to think about trying to find a permanent proxy to use.

There's no telling if one day one of us might get our door kicked down for watching "terrorist promoting videos" on Youtube.

-Will



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 03:41 AM
link   
this is unbelievable

i guess the internet now has no privacy as well

tomorrow we'll see internet toll booths
the next day we'll see internet draw bridges

when its all said and done, while we're waiting on a page to load, a lions club member is going to popup via webcam and ask us to donate money to their firefighter boot



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 03:50 AM
link   
Greed wins over privacy - surprise, surprise.

I guess Viacom has made itself an enemy of the people.

Never assume anonymity even when using a proxy . While proxies certainly make it more complicated, don't forget many of those proxy providers and anon re-mailers are probably shills for the CIA and other information collectors. Unless you know who you're dealing with, you may be unknowingly stepping into a spiders web.


[edit on 4-7-2008 by verylowfrequency]



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 04:32 AM
link   
Has anyone else thought of this possibility? Has anyone the heard news of old employees that worked for Google in the past, there information like Social Security numbers, addresses, and the likes were stolen from an out sourcing company that Google used.


Google has confirmed that personal data of U.S. employees hired prior to 2006 have been stolen in a recent burglary.




Records kept at Colt Express Outsourcing Services, an external company Google and other companies use to handle human resources functions, were stolen in a burglary on May 26. An undisclosed number of employees' details and those of dependents such as names, addresses, and Social Security numbers were on the stolen computers. It is understood that Colt did not employ encryption to protect the information.

news.cnet.com...

Is it possible the MPAA, RIAA, or its minions are somehow involved? If they were able to bribe, threaten, convince, old Google employees to divulge information that could play into favor for Viacom with there well publicized court case against Google.

It just seems rather too convenient that 6500 employee information goes up missing all while the judge has ordered Google to hand over private user data to Viacom. But no they'll never use that information in there crusade against the grandmother who can't operate a computer, or against the single mother of three. Doesn't anyone else get fed up and tired of this non sense?

Opps better put me on a watchlist.


[edit on 4-7-2008 by oconnection]



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
I'm probably gonna get flagged...
i have 7 months worth of Masons, NWO, ufo and alien, and various types of political research all under youtube and various sites....
i was being monitered for a while, thats why I stopped my masons research...



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by applebiter
 



yea, but by watching the video, you are essentially downloading it anyways, because it ends up in your browser cache. which I guess this is all about in the first place.



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Question Fate
 


Nope. The court is fully aware that even if you see something by accident that it will end up in your cache. Don't think for a moment that they don't know much better than you how the technology works.

The point is the intent. That is what they have to prove. Did you mean to see that conspiracy video? Did you know that you would be exposed to material classified under National Security? These are the pertinent questions. If you go out of your way to cover your tracks or to download the material, then your intent is proven. Here's a heads-up about proxies - many of them are directly funded by law enforcement agencies by way of private contract, and the ones that aren't can be monitored. There simply is no such thing as privacy on the Internet, and that's a fact. Just go ahead and disabuse yourself of the idea that you can do anything and not get caught.

Note to lurkers - I'm not trying to interfere with any investigations, but simply give a heads up to people so they don't do something in the first place that they aren't supposed to do. If it reduces the size of your catch because the folks here decided against doing something illegal, then you don't have a damn thing to complain about. Except, of course, for a the lower number of people whom you can paint as "bad guys" in order to pursue more restrictive legislation or increased funding...



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by applebiter
 


yes, im sure they know that, i was just pointing it out that even if you arent clicking a "download" button, the content is still downloading. so make a point of clearing your caches



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   
You mean Dubya gets to see all the cat playing, talking cat, reverse speech, home blacksmithing-make your own knife from stock, fishing, hunting, and little babies being cute videos I've watched? (Don't watch the live birth videos, you will get sick. Oh, gross.) Not to mention the videos of what you get when you fold a five dollar or twenty dollar bill in certain ways and see the WTC towers burning and falling or the latest video searches I've been on concerning stock market manipulations like the one in 1908 that is similar to the one we're experiencing now in 2008. And then there's the Rainbow 6 Vegas videos I've watched and the misdirects I didn't mean to watch. Oh, and let's don't forget the screamers. I hate those kinds of videos. Poor Dubya. Poor poor Dubya. All those screamer videos he has to watch now that he's spying on us even more.


Here's a screamer link to YouTube, in case you've never seen one. They are disturbing and if you have a heart condition or are a kid or a nervous person DON'T WATCH IT.

www.youtube.com...

I hate screamers.







[edit on 4-7-2008 by Bowcatz001]



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 09:10 PM
link   
That's frustrating because I can't even see what videos I've looked at. Unless someone can u2u me a way. I found this one profile with videos of the Bank of America and Coca-Cola HQ; Odd videos like that. But when I went back to try and find the videos the videos were hidden from the searches and I couldn't find the user either. Frustrating that some spam mail corp can probably find those videos before I can.



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 10:26 PM
link   
I could be wrong but the article stated that the EFF said it was a "set-back to privacy rights"...

Isn't that what we are all saying? Why is everyone blaming the EFF when it was Viacom that Google was fighting?

[edit on 4-7-2008 by Sublime620]



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join