Google encountered a "Privacy doors."

Safeguard the privacy of the fighters started cannon to Google.

Because of these years, Google, through its search engine, video sites (YouTube) and e-mail (Gmail) has collected a large number of users

Information, which is on public domain of large-scale aggression.

However, the attack can completely let Google your hands, or outstanding

Things.

Wednesday, the Manhattan District Court judge Louis LStanton accepting Google be sued's case, he urged Google as soon as their YouTube

Involved users (number 10) information available to Viacom (Viacom), because these YouTube users for upload infringing video, he

They will face a $ 1 billion in damages in tort.

Weiyakang mother wished to adopt the data proves that uploaded infringing video in YouTube number to watch than non-infringing video.

In this case, the right to privacy, before returning to acting on many bloggers have also put the matter as a gimmick.

Electronic Frontier Foundation Attorney Kurt Opsahl recognition

As these YouTube user violates the video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) privacy exposure all users in the YouTube, it is not

Kind.

Long-term attention Google development of commentators DannySullivan, YouTube, there is no such thing as privacy, judge Stanton is purely out of a molehill. In fact, it is clear and Stanton not to fundamentally solve the problem of invasion of privacy. According to information of weiyakang, Google's data if the mother of her own company weiyakang information search. Legal experts and lawyers weiyakang parent corporation are logged by Google for YouTube user information. This really ironic. If the data analysis for the real name, so the parent can only be used for weiyakang litigation. Because the transition of data leakage would cause the mother suffered another weiyakang. Lift a stone on one's own feet, it does not pay. Weiyakang mother litigators MikeFricklas said, so far, invasion of privacy or on paper. We never felt in each suspected case name or the IP is carrying out a review, this is simply not realistic. We can only perform statistical analysis, from a macro perspective, complete the procedure.

Art technology law group's lead counsel Gregory Rutchik believes that lawyers call saver universal are blah because privacy data

Some present-day Taiwan hands don't value.

He felt that parent unique weiyakang can do is to rethink the litigation perspective. Apparently Viacom, and more between lawyers to the great wall, if you believe in the effectiveness of the judicial system, you may lose security on YouTube. Stanton judges want to prevent the leakage of private information: those others privacy information to people on YouTube really should receive sanctions, but Google also on video filtering and copyright protection to do some work, it's hard to deny it. YouTuve lawyers CatherineLacavera believes that judges weigh is Google's small victory, because the Court had already started to limit the investigation, they rejected the use of user privacy weiyakang mother video and Google search technology. In her view, Google should be prosecuted in weiyakang mother before all anonymity protection.

However, the electronic privacy information center (EPIC) Director Marc Rotenberg is of the view that the current legal defect-ridden, Google does not protect

Information.

He insisted that the mother should get any weiyakang on this case supportive evidence, but Google has set up obstacles. In fact, as long as

Google to provide the information to independent third parties, we will be able to resolve the contradiction between the two sides.

Google's privacy policy is included if, for legal purposes the data available to third parties. Google Product Manager ScottPetry believes that if we accept this privacy policy on this matter, we would have to comply with relevant laws. But he also pointed out that in many cases, Google shall have the right to not provide the Government with user privacy information. EPIC of Rotenberg think things proved Wednesday Web user behaviour of potential crisis, this is our years. Google reserves

Too much user information, it makes more and more personal privacy is not secure.

Google and surrounding weiyakang lawsuit between the mother and many advertisers recognizes "the importance of behavioral research".

Google, Microsoft, AOL is

Have started giving users online behavior as the market of the citizenry.

EMarket advertising analysis revealed that only 23.6% of respondents think that advertisers keep anonymous user history browse records is "Yes," but 57.2% of respondents insisted that advertisers Act violated their right to privacy, should resort to the law. It seems that the future privacy of struggle will continue.