Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Groklaw

Intellectual Property Law

: Groklaw

How Viacom Ambushed YouTube and You - Updated

By Pamela Jones et al.

I found some evidence Google tried hard to protect user confidentiality, in some letters to the judge in the court docket of Viacom v. YouTube. After the Order [PDF; text here] issued, Google didn't give up, but is continuing even now by asking the court in a letter to reconsider the decision and let them redact personally identifiable data. They fought hard against Viacom's motion to compel [PDF]. And the evidence indicates to me that what happened was a kind of SCO-like maneuver on Viacom's part.

Viacom filed its motion, Google filed its memo in opposition combined with a cross motion for a protective order [PDF], and then Viacom in its reply, which is supposed to be the final word before a motion is decided, put in new materials and new legal arguments, according to Google's letter. As you remember, from SCO v. IBM, when that happens -- and it's not supposed to happen -- the other side can ask the judge to let it file a surreply, so it gets a chance to answer the new arguments and evidence, which otherwise would stand unopposed. Viacom denied the accusation, but Google's letter was successful, which ought to tell us something.

I'll show you the letters that Google and Viacom sent to the judge regarding the motion to compel, and in reading them, I think you will get a more rounded glimpse of what went on, despite the sealing of the memoranda of law in connection with the motion. I have some more filings too, to complete the picture, including an exhibit listing videos on YouTube that Viacom views as infringing.

Full post as published by Groklaw on July 04, 2008 (boomark / email).