The dispute hinges on the privacy of YouTube's users. The judge ordered the video-sharing giant to turn over usernames, IP addresses and a massive database of user activity, along with similar information about the uploading activity of its own employees.
Google balked at the order, instead trying to cut a deal that would mask the data in such a way as to protect users' privacy. Viacom claimed to have proposed a similar plan, even though the judge's order included no such stipulation.
"Viacom and other plaintiffs never should have demanded private viewing data in the first place," a Google spokesman said. "They should have agreed a week ago to let us anonymize it. We are willing to discuss the disclosure of viewing activity of all the relevant parties. But the simple issue of protecting user information should be resolved now. Our users' privacy should not be held hostage to advance the plaintiffs' additional litigation interests."
The judge's order alarmed privacy advocates. Online guru Brandon "Fight The Patent" told XBIZ that decisions like these may have a chilling effect on video-sharing sites.
"Besides just getting a list of people who uploaded [copyrighted content], [Viacom] is also getting the usernames of those that watched those videos."
Greg Sandoval of CNET News said that the case may hinge on whether Google can keep the activity of its YouTube employees secret.
"It could go a long way to proving how much knowledge YouTube has about piracy on the site," he said. "If YouTube employees knew what was uploaded to the site or posted pirated clips themselves —YouTube could lose its protection under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act."