digg

Join DiggAbout

F*CK VIACOM! watch!

youtube.com — Philip DeFranco talks about Viacom and Fireworks.....

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • thegr8merlyn, on 07/04/2008, -46/+11Wow... that's all there is to say to that.. Gotta love big government.. Heres to the USSA (United Socialist States of America).
    • evoair95, on 07/05/2008, -8/+15socialism FTW
      • therocksays, on 07/05/2008, -8/+3***** you
      • ayeroxor, on 07/05/2008, -1/+10Why would you say "***** you" to someone that likes socialism? America, like all western countries, enjoys a great deal of socialism:

        * public schools
        * police departments
        * fire departments
        * hospitals are required by law to perform life-saving procedures even if you can't pay
        * transportation departments
        * public libraries

        etc etc. If you're so sure you don't like socialism, you better not ever take advantage of any of the above services, or you're just another ***** hypocrite.
      • ayeroxor, on 07/06/2008, -0/+2Oh, I almost forgot: There is even a place in America where every resident is guaranteed any medical services for free, paid for by the taxpayers: Prison.

        That's right. Prison inmates have a constitutional right to healthcare that law-abiding civilians can't get. "Compassionate" conservatives think this is fair.
    • SQLserver, on 07/05/2008, -1/+18MORON.
      This has NOTHING TO DO WITH SOCIALISM.

      This is the same old Conservative 'Big Coporations are your best pals!' thinking that ends up with corporations like Viacom screwing everyone over.
    • JigsawX, on 07/05/2008, -0/+4Here yea go UFSA (United Fascist States of America)
    • dudeguy1234, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1This was caused by big business influencing government policy

      Socialism leads to regulated business

      Capitalism leads to conglomerates
      Conglomerates have enormous political power
      Businesses that hold political power lead to
      Businesses influencing political decisions causes
      Unregulated leaders (Because the REAL leaders become the CEO's)
      Unregulated rule leads to fascism

      And of course

      Socialism != capitalism

      So your analysis fails.
  • WalesAlex, on 07/04/2008, -5/+286***** Viacom.
    • KnightHawk2277, on 07/05/2008, -4/+77more like.....

      |||||||||||||||||||---|||---------||||---|||||||||||||||||||---|||------|||
      |||---------------|||---------||||---|||---------------|||----|||--
      |||---------------|||---------||||---|||---------------|||--|||----
      |||||||||||---------|||---------||||---|||---------------||||||------
      |||---------------|||---------||||---|||---------------|||--|||----
      |||---------------|||---------||||---|||---------------|||----|||--
      |||---------------|||||||||||||||||||---|||||||||||||||||||---|||------|||

      ||||||---------||||||---|||||||||||||||||||---------|||---------|||||||||||||||||||---|||||||||||||||||||---|||||------------||||||
      --|||---------|||-----------|||--------------|||-|||-------|||---------------|||----------|||---|||-|||---------|||-|||
      ---|||-------|||------------|||-------------|||---|||------|||---------------|||----------|||---|||--|||-------|||--|||
      ----|||-----|||-------------|||------------|||||||||||||-----|||---------------|||----------|||---|||---|||-----|||---|||
      -----|||---|||--------------|||-----------|||-------|||----|||---------------|||----------|||---|||----|||---|||----|||
      ------|||-|||---------------|||----------|||---------|||---|||---------------|||----------|||---|||-----|||-|||-----|||
      -------||||-----------|||||||||||||||||||---|||----------|||---|||||||||||||||||||---|||||||||||||||||||---|||------||||------|||
    • KhanneaNL, on 07/05/2008, -0/+18Why not tell them in person:

      http://www.viacom.com/Contact/Pages/default.aspx
    • 30somethinDad, on 07/05/2008, -0/+7VIACOM = banned for life
      VIACOM = Enemy of the American People
      • ZER0Spirit, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0VIACOM = NOT JUST THE AMERICAN ENEMYS THE WHOLE DAM WORLDS!
    • Suprfire, on 07/05/2008, -0/+4and
      ***** THE RIAA!
    • HammerAndBoner, on 07/05/2008, -0/+6and
      ***** TACO BELL
      I'm tired of your overpriced chalupas!
    • Lendon2020, on 07/06/2008, -0/+4and
      ***** THE MPAA

      And if we missed anyone well, ***** you too!
    • david2254, on 08/10/2008, -0/+0agreed..power back to the people.viacom can go to hell
  • Apptendo, on 07/04/2008, -11/+105DEATH TO VIACOM!!!!!!!!!!!!
    • KhanneaNL, on 07/05/2008, -8/+1I dare you to shoot a viacom executive. Big words, no balls.

      http://www.viacom.com/Contact/Pages/default.aspx
      • wilywondr, on 07/05/2008, -0/+4Death to viacom death to viacom execs.
        Death to viacom = (viacom stock = zero)
    • elnerdo, on 07/05/2008, -1/+14To add a contrary voice to this conversation:
      1. Some of this is Google's fault. A while back, they anonymized their web searches in order to prevent something like this from happening. However, they continued to log user-identifiable information for their other services (like YouTube)
      2. While Google has been ordered to give up the information, they haven't actually given it up yet, as far as I know, and they plan on fighting the decision further.
      3. We/Google should've been able to see a decision like this coming. Google's standard argument regarding copyright infringement on YouTube is that copyright-holding companies can browse through YouTube and request that things be removed. It should've been obvious that the counter-argument to that would be: "It's too hard to browse through all of that information online, and besides, how will this help us prosecute the violators? We demand that you give us all of the information!"
      4. Yes Viacom is evil, and it sucks, but the person you should be really angry at is the Judge who ordered this. He's the moron here.
      • cinnix, on 07/05/2008, -1/+2Then of course there's the famous in-house policy of Google's - "Don't be evil". Yea, Google may have broken this in the past (for example, the demo app at the launch of Google Apps Engine was more or less a clone of 37signals Basecamp. Google did however remove the app within days of launch to abide by their policy, although this was after the public kicked up a fuss over it).

        Public image is very important for Google, I'd imagine they would fight this to maintain that image - though of course this is more large-scale and complicated.
      • Stroggoth, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2Google is to blame for (a) keeping this information and (b) for keeping it for so long and (c) keeping it personally identifiable. If they hadn't kept it, it wouldn't be available for Viacom to take. I see some claiming this was 'private information', but when you sign up for Google/Youtube, you agree to a weak policy that says your information will generally be kept hidden, except in some circumstances. Your privacy was surrendered when Google was given the keys to the castle. Viacom then asked the court to surrender everything Google knew, which is a LOT.

        I want to see Google STOP keeping this information, there is no good that can come of it, aside from Big Brother uses.
  • Gemizo, on 07/04/2008, -46/+8Sxephil, why are you always so desperate to get attention? You got the information in this video OFF OF DIGG (it was very popular yesterday), so you are just resubmitting the same story, and advertising it in your video's description. If you really wanted to raise awareness you would have linked to the actual, original story, not this stuff.
    • xcrudex, on 07/04/2008, -9/+3Gemizo, why are you so over critical of someone trying to spread the news? Don't be so affected by the fact that Phil wants to get the information out.

      Get real and stop getting affected over nothing. :)
      • owls27, on 07/05/2008, -2/+1I'm trying to make sense from this...this guy gets money from these videos. getting the information out vs. selling the information to get hits.....I don't know about sxephil, who I find extremely annoying anyway, but similar youtube faces are likely owned by these very same companies. What I do know is, they audition for many roles on these youtube videos. They are for profit, right?
    • Smithamax, on 07/06/2008, -1/+1maybe he wanted to give his opinion on the matter.
      discussing things like this it how you build awareness and how people develop balanced points of view.
    • sykilik101, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0Hello, not EVERYONE who goes to Digg goes to his videos on YouTube. It's an issue that bugs him, and since he's popular on YouTube, he decided to get the word out about it.
  • SteveDeathbat, on 07/04/2008, -21/+11***** Viacom
    and republicans
    but mainly Viacom
  • miked860, on 07/04/2008, -19/+6***** VIACOM, YOUR PROGRAMMING ***** SUCKS!!!!
  • tjparson1286, on 07/04/2008, -17/+5why are old people who don't understand the internet making all the decisions about it…this ***** is ***** up
    • Kuze77, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1well, the old ***** in charge of this country don't know ***** about the technology.
    • brandonha, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5wow Yeah because thats original. We wouldn't have noticed your cleverness if you didn't capitalize it. Douche.
    • Joshuarr, on 07/05/2008, -2/+2If you don't like it, either get the hell out, or do something to make it a better place.
  • BryanG831, on 07/04/2008, -5/+240I HATE YOU ***** VIACOM! LEAVE YOUTUBE ALOOOONE!
  • someaznpersonRP, on 07/04/2008, -6/+67***** Viacom

    that's all I have to say.
    • Stroggoth, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1And ***** Google/Youtube for keeping this kind of information in the first place. At least Microsoft doesn't archive my entire history of web use for all eternity.
      • MightyMack, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Google only collects that info so that they find relevant ads, related videos, and correct you search spelling mistakes. They're not doing anything bad with it.
      • Stroggoth, on 07/05/2008, -0/+0They are doing something bad with - giving it to Viacom under court order. Google would have to resist this court order before I would agree that they are protecting my privacy.

        The road to hell is paved with good intentions, you know.
      • LeeSoong, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1The road to Viacom profits is paved with stealing youtube marketing information.

        A Completely transparent money grab by Viacom.

        Why not have Websters dictionary copyright all words and sue everyone for using their words ?

        If Websters can get the same Judge ( Louis L. Stanton ) it's MONEY TIME!
  • rebostorm19, on 07/04/2008, -6/+133this is a violation of our human rights and should be against our privacy laws. ***** Viacom the bastards that stole my ID
    • banmaster, on 07/05/2008, -7/+34How is it against your human rights??
      No fan of Viacom myself, but 'human rights'?? You're ***** stupid!
    • bdurkin, on 07/05/2008, -7/+2Your whole identity is a IP address? I agree with banmaster in that im not a huge fan of viacom or any big corporation but they are looking to make money just as you are. If anything I blame the stupid judge more than them.
    • HtomSirveaux, on 07/05/2008, -0/+7I think what is not considered by banmaster and bdurkin is that this is a violation of the right to privacy regardless of how Viacom intends to use the account info. Furthermore, as De Franco stated, this is either a Neocon-activist judge or just a dumb ass in a black robe setting a precedent that any entity concerned with their intellectual property not making the maximum amount of profit possible can sue to get every user's otherwise private information just so they can see how much of it is being "stolen."

      Think of this case in pre-internet terms. A group of authors hates the fact that one person can checkout their books from the local library and show it to as many people as they can. They sue because that extra few bucks is not being made and in the process can find out everyone's personal information, address, reading habits, what they've been searching for in the catalog, frequency of checkout, and so on.

      I'm amazed that a judge, who has infinitely more knowledge of the law than I do, ruled in favor of Viacom on this part and gave one company all of our information which was guaranteed by Youtube.com to be kept private. Now NBC can do the same, Clear Channel, the MPAA, the RIAA, etc. and even a possible civil suit against Youtube.com for violating their privacy contract wouldn't surprise me.

      The fact that some people are brushing this off as no big deal is quite sad and shameful.

      Please, quit giving this country to corporations. They are not citizens. They do not have individual rights. They have no primordial ethics or morals. Their only concern is money and liability. Keep them on a tight leash.

      Don't let them get away with this.
      • wshs, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1You also have to consider that judges in the US don't get the job because of their intelligence, nor their knowledge of law, but either from their popularity, or friendship with someone powerful.
  • Reaprar, on 07/04/2008, -1/+107Third video today I've seen titled '***** Viacom' third one today I've agreed with.
    • LeeSoong, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1BOYCOTT Viacom.

      Boycott their programs, boycott their advertisers - and email the advertisers telling them the reason you are boycotting their products is because they support Viacom's assault on individual's privacy rights.

      Boycott their products - anything sold by Viacom, DVDs, etc - write BestBuy, Circuit City, etc and ask them to stop carrying Viacom products.

      The only way to punish Viacom is to deny them profits,
      disregard their content as worthless,
      and send a message to their bottom line:

      Just Say No to Viacom.
  • Snoopy92, on 07/04/2008, -1/+18Just another way for the government to monitor everything we do, ridiculous. Even more so because VIACOM have...no...idea what they're doing. So if they're going to watch everything we do, Go ***** yourself Viacom.
  • Ozmer, on 07/04/2008, -8/+3Nice to know that there is a Judge who thinks Civil Liberties can be violated so easily... NOT! The judge should be dis-bared and forced to give a public apology. If he refuses the apology they should send a squad of monkeys to molest him with retractable batons! This better see a higher court!
  • hellgas00, on 07/04/2008, -12/+8http://digg.com/tech_news/Youtube_to_hand_over_all ...
  • najjman, on 07/04/2008, -2/+51I hope everyone on youtube starts some ***** about this and theres a HUGE UPROAR.
    • KhanneaNL, on 07/05/2008, -2/+2Be my guest!

      http://www.viacom.com/Contact/Pages/default.aspx
    • SQLserver, on 07/05/2008, -1/+9Except half of youtube is idiotic 9-16 year olds, mostly American idiots(not that all americans are idiots), who don't even know what the big word 'censorship' means, and are 'votin' for McCain cause Obama is an Islam'.
      • sysop073, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1I don't think we have a huge problem with the 9-16 age bracket voting for anybody
    • Sawta, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2If by "start some *****", you mean geting off ***** youtube and actually taking to the streets in protest, then yes, maybe *something* will be done.

      Otherwise, your living in a dream world; it's not like the judge would ever actually go to youtube, or even know what it is, let alone giving a flying ***** about what people on it have to say about his decision.
  • Chikyuu, on 07/05/2008, -7/+2What a bunch of.... *****... ALL information...
  • fxu1989, on 07/05/2008, -9/+3viaCON
  • BenjaminWolf, on 07/05/2008, -8/+5That's invasion of privacy. What are they going to due sue anyone who watched their show??? wtf is up with that. I wouldn't watch there shows if they paid me to. I'm just pissed because it's an invasion of privacy.
  • zennie62, on 07/05/2008, -19/+4Hello,

    Here's my video on the matter:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ua_XT1RJIE
  • Alsqr, on 07/05/2008, -23/+5Sxephil , Go F_CK Your self
  • encore0518, on 07/05/2008, -11/+1Via-*****
  • Falldog, on 07/05/2008, -11/+2As much as I might want to digg this story, I have to bury in good conscious thanks to these retarded comments.
    • MillionsLivio, on 07/05/2008, -2/+4Your basing a story off of the comments, isn't that backwards?
  • revolution2, on 07/05/2008, -9/+0Fack *****! Google will fak them up big time!
  • s13vin4t0r, on 07/05/2008, -10/+3DIE VIACOM DIE.
  • djepik, on 07/05/2008, -0/+143Let's all boycott them!

    Just make sure that you don't like to watch: BET, CMT, Comedy Central, MTV, Spike TV, TV Land, Paramount Pictures or Dreamworks Studios. Oh and you also can't play Rock Band (Harmonix).

    http://www.viacom.com/ourbrands/brandindex/Pages/d ...

    Conglomerates ROCK!!
    • Babazoz, on 07/05/2008, -8/+1Nope. I seriously don't watch a one of them. OM NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM
      • zspade, on 07/05/2008, -0/+3"OM NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM"

        What? I assume this was the sound of you eating your own brain.
      • Babazoz, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Yes. I honestly don't watch any of the above, and I eat my own brain.

        ....


        .....


        anyway.....
    • int10h, on 07/05/2008, -5/+2You forgot Gametrailers.
    • NNOP, on 07/05/2008, -2/+32Boycott The Colbert Report and The Daily Show..?

      ... I'm conflicted
      • jfg84, on 07/05/2008, -1/+4You shouldn't be. Change starts happening when you make personal sacrifices. Not when you sit around complaining about it.
      • Pinkshisno, on 07/05/2008, -0/+19Just watch them illegally.
      • Gene04, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5I just watch it in full on their own website. They don't get any revenue from me because of the almighty adblock that everyone flaunts about.
      • ubrikkean, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1He's got a point. You can't siphon your support to just the makers of a piece of the conglomerate, unfortunately.
    • jstem1994, on 07/05/2008, -2/+12Except for Comedy Central, I'm good w/ this list.
      • nikehat, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Really? So I guess then you're fine with boycotting the following movies:

        http://www.imdb.com/company/co0023400/
        http://www.imdb.com/company/co0067641/
      • hbeierg, on 07/05/2008, -0/+3@nikehat
        Pay? Movies?
      • jstem1994, on 07/06/2008, -1/+1Yeah, both lists are pretty much *****.

        Oh wait, "Crocodile Dundee in Los Angeles" is on there! What was I thinking?? /sarcasm
      • nikehat, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Hmm, you're right. The Godfather Trilogy, Saving Private Ryan, Raiders of the Lost Arc, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, American Beauty, Forrest Gump, Iron Man, Gladiator, Braveheart, Grease, Saturday Night Fever, Mission: Impossible, There Will Be Blood and about 2600 other movies are *****. Next time maybe read the actual list? But nah why bother, reading's complicated.
    • keviniskool, on 07/05/2008, -3/+2I like Harmonix though. At least their previous games aren't owned by Viacom.
    • TomRemixed, on 07/05/2008, -3/+3***** Via... oh... um yea.
    • 4udacious, on 07/05/2008, -2/+5Son of a bitch...
      THEY OWN NEOPETS?!?

      http://www.viacom.com/ourbrands/medianetworks/mtvn ...
      • rapcrap187, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2Viacom owns a huge chunk of the entertainment buisiness my god, I watch like all their *****, BAH ***** VIACOM! Oh and just watch your daily show and ultimate fighter on veoh :) easy alternative.
        Thank god youtube is 1/1000 of the video web sharing sites. I think all you metacafes, liveleaks, daily motions and other sites should make a youtube killer
    • jgaba24, on 07/05/2008, -0/+3All of these with the exception of comedy central suck ass anyway...Does anyone still watch mtv, what a festering turd that channel is...Didnt the "m" in mtv stand for music at some point?
    • mufffin, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2You also shouldn't let your children (if any) watch Nickelodeon.
    • AnalogCamera, on 07/05/2008, -1/+3I'd boycott all of these, but I have Rock Band and it's my absolute favorite game.

      It is quite conflicting.
      • SuicideMouse, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Explore other games.

        That or, if you must fail, boycott everything else.
    • SquigglyP, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1No Blockbuster Video either, so don't go rent something to make up for not watching so much TV. Goto Hollywood Video or something.
    • mrASSMAN, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Just go to piratebay instead of the TV.
  • therightclique, on 07/05/2008, -12/+3god damn it. this guy is a ***** douchebag that clearly stole his entire shtick from 3 frat friendly comedians. yeah, viacom is *****' *****, but so is this guy.
  • Xraven92, on 07/05/2008, -2/+65***** you Viacom....you and your seal clubbing...
  • Jpardue, on 07/05/2008, -9/+2Did you here Viacom called his wife a *****?
  • MastaShake11, on 07/05/2008, -6/+1Viacom can ***** yourselves. NO REALLY
  • dn11, on 07/05/2008, -6/+17i agree that Viacom needs to die in a fire, but everyone seems to be forgetting that Google already has all of that said data on you and they are allowed to use it however they want... why aren't more people afraid of that? (because... google told us they aren't evil..)
    • NNOP, on 07/05/2008, -2/+7Yeah, actually if Google deleted all that data as soon as it came in it wouldn't be a problem.
    • Stroggoth, on 07/05/2008, -1/+1Google is the root of the problem here. If the info didn't exist, nobody could ask for it.

      Google is a bit like the Bush government - they say they are only hunting the "bad guys", but in effect they compromise the privacy of everyone in their day-to-day operations.
      • MightyMack, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1If it didn't exist, google would never correct your search spelling mistakes, or find related videos.
      • Stroggoth, on 07/05/2008, -0/+0Riiiiiight. Google couldn't correct spelling mistakes without tracking my personal identification and infinite search history. Such bullsh*t.
  • ChefEspeff, on 07/05/2008, -7/+22One Dane Cook made me want to kill myself. Now two, just...ugh.
  • gamben0, on 07/05/2008, -2/+5I hate your face.
  • candyman420, on 07/05/2008, -14/+14that guy is kinda irritating to listen to
    • rentmitchum, on 07/05/2008, -2/+13Extremely irritating. "Hi, I'm youtube guy, I talk through my nose and sound sorta like someone is sitting on my chest or I'm straining to push out a *****."

      It works better when you can hear me imitate it..
      • SuicideMouse, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5Upload an mp3 or something.

        Seriously.
  • dasdef, on 07/05/2008, -1/+1haha 'it funny like that'
  • ren1999, on 07/05/2008, -0/+39They are also trying to steal Google's Search Engine Trade Secrets. They asked for that code even though it isn't a part of the suit. I think they should be investigated.
  • DigitAl56K, on 07/05/2008, -1/+12Why the F can't Google just be allowed to hand over all the data for Viacom's claimed clips only, after removing personal information?
    • DigitAl56K, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5Second thought, why is anything more detailed than number of views material to this case?
    • lundeja, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2They are trying to prove that people are viewing copyrighted clips more than personal videos, therefore they needed info for all clips.
  • elislider, on 07/05/2008, -1/+14am i the only one who couldnt focus on the video at all because i was confused why he said it was "wednesday july 4th" right at the start? uhh isnt it friday..?
    • beaunewcomb, on 07/05/2008, -1/+2I second that... I actually stopped the video.. how could I take this seriously?
  • beautifulbeast, on 07/05/2008, -0/+6About a boycott to Viacom: I just looked their entry up in Wikipedia and they seem to own absolutely everything in the entertainment industry including Nickelodeon and MTV but also some of my favorite wb sites like GameTrailers and ScrewAttack. I'm scared.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom#Assets
    • SuicideMouse, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1You should be, single corps own the majority of *everything*.

      Even scarier... who owns them?
  • kashem, on 07/05/2008, -1/+2His commentary reminds me of Ze Frank -- ahh I need a proper Ze Fix.
  • KnightHawk2277, on 07/05/2008, -7/+152|||||||||||||||||||---|||---------||||---|||||||||||||||||||---|||------|||
    |||---------------|||---------||||---|||---------------|||----|||--
    |||---------------|||---------||||---|||---------------|||--|||----
    |||||||||||---------|||---------||||---|||---------------||||||------
    |||---------------|||---------||||---|||---------------|||--|||----
    |||---------------|||---------||||---|||---------------|||----|||--
    |||---------------|||||||||||||||||||---|||||||||||||||||||---|||------|||

    ||||||---------||||||---|||||||||||||||||||---------|||---------|||||||||||||||||||---|||||||||||||||||||---|||||------------||||||
    --|||---------|||-----------|||--------------|||-|||-------|||---------------|||----------|||---|||-|||---------|||-|||
    ---|||-------|||------------|||-------------|||---|||------|||---------------|||----------|||---|||--|||-------|||--|||
    ----|||-----|||-------------|||------------|||||||||||||-----|||---------------|||----------|||---|||---|||-----|||---|||
    -----|||---|||--------------|||-----------|||-------|||----|||---------------|||----------|||---|||----|||---|||----|||
    ------|||-|||---------------|||----------|||---------|||---|||---------------|||----------|||---|||-----|||-|||-----|||
    -------||||-----------|||||||||||||||||||---|||----------|||---|||||||||||||||||||---|||||||||||||||||||---|||------||||------|||
    • ep53, on 07/05/2008, -5/+1How did you get the purple writing? I just smoked a few bowls, i hope its not my eyes playing up. Maybe thats why its called purple haze?
      • adhiza, on 07/05/2008, -0/+14its actually black, you're probably viewing it from above on an LCD screen.
      • IAmCuteKitty, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1tn panels ftw lol
      • biggerapple3am, on 07/05/2008, -0/+0well ***** my ass, it is purple if I tip the screen down!
      • IAmCuteKitty, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1i meant ftl and yes they suck
      • MightyMack, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Its actually the the ways the "|" is shown on your screen, its made of blue and red pixels, giving it a purple look if you stare at it too long.
      • SuicideMouse, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1"Purple Haze" isn't around anymore AFAIK it was an OLD strain, it has to do with the growing process, certain variables will cause it to appear purple. Anything sold as "Purple Haze" nowadays is just a different strain that went through a similar process, it really has nothing to do with the quality.

        Though this is all off my memory so I may be wrong.
    • dcd722, on 07/05/2008, -2/+11Can we post this on every Youtube comment page?
  • sholde4, on 07/05/2008, -6/+4Does posting a video response make you stupid, or does being stupid make you post a video response? At any rate, everyone sounds like they've recently had a lobotomy.
  • i11uminati, on 07/05/2008, -0/+17lol...bitch wands
  • XeN0cidE, on 07/05/2008, -1/+4Bitches be Crazy.
  • Unterland, on 07/05/2008, -2/+93'''Philippe Dauman''' is the CEO of [[Viacom]]. He has served at this post since September of 2006. Dauman is a longtime associate of the company's chairman [[Sumner Redstone]]. Dauman served from 1994 to 2000 as a member of Viacom's executive committee and as executive vice president in charge of strategic transactions, legal and government affairs, human resources and administration, supervising [[Paramount Pictures]] Entertainment, [[Showtime]] Networks and [[Simon & Schuster]]. Dauman was also a director at Redstone-owned [[CBS Corporation]] until September 2006.

    From 1993 to 1998, he also was Viacom's general counsel. AND HES A PIECE OF CRAP.
    The Judge is Louis Stanton, contact information:

    500 Pearl St., Room 2250
    New York, NY 10007

    Chambers Phone: (212) 805-0252

    Deputy Phone: (212) 805-0123

    http://www1.nysd.uscourts.gov/judge_info.php?id=31

    It'd be nice if someone could find his home phone number or that of his daughter or wife (Susan Helen Stanton is the daughter, Phoebe R. Stanton is the wife). Let's see how he likes his personal information spread around. Repost.

    Doesn't anyone remember the writer's strike? They were striking for compensation for internet released videos. Companies like Viacom were against paying writers for internet material dubbed simply as "promotional." Now they want sue Google for lost revenue of online video clips?? Oh the irony of it all.

    Philippe P. Dauman, CEO/President/Director of VIACOM
    1515 Broadway
    New York, NY 10036
    Phone: (212) 258-6000
    411.com gives us this number for him too.
    (212) 258-6639


    Enjoy, and make his life a living hell.
  • Ryan0617, on 07/05/2008, -2/+1Anyone have any idea how long this case will last anyway?
  • Jennefah, on 07/05/2008, -0/+16I used to work for a cinema owned by Viacom. These guys will skim off the top to save money every chance they get, ESPECIALLY where it comes down to actually serving decent entertainment and food at their cinemas.

    So yeah, ***** VIACOM.

    Also, don't eat their popcorn. That ***** ain't butter.
    • hotpuck6, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5dude, it's never butter.
    • godfather2729, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5I can't believe its not butter!
    • jp1979, on 07/06/2008, -0/+0Please tell me it is atleast 70% vegetable oil.....
  • chrisvc86, on 07/05/2008, -1/+19Go kill yourself Viacom. ***** piece of hypocritical *****.

    Also, take Unterland's advice and make these people responsible know that you don't ***** with the internet and people's privacy, which they're just going to use to as marketing research anyway to further sell you more *****.
  • idastheman, on 07/05/2008, -1/+10"Although Google has been ordered to hand over YouTube data to Viacom, it has emerged that a protective order has been issued and only the media giant’s lawyers can access the data to prove piracy."

    • blacklilyninja, on 07/05/2008, -0/+4um... its the lawyers that dole out the lawsuits
    • peterlisanti, on 07/05/2008, -0/+3Well I hope the lawyers' sql skills are up to date.
      I hear there is 50 or so terrabyes of log files...
    • ChillyEli, on 07/05/2008, -0/+3I really don't care if it's "just the lawyers". The fact of the matter is that my private information that I trusted Google with, Viacom now has.

      Lawyers, Doctors, Cleaning Workers, etc. They could give it to whoever they want. The fact is is that private information that I have on my profile is being passed around. And I don't like it.
      • Stroggoth, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2>The fact of the matter is that my private information that I trusted Google with

        Therein lies your mistake. Don't trust Google.
    • jaymzdean, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1idastheman, please give me some contact info, so that we can set it up for my lawyer examine your personal information.
  • asus2000, on 07/05/2008, -0/+4Google: "We are pleased the court put some limits on discovery," Google said in the statement, "including refusing to allow Viacom to access users' private videos and our search technology. We are disappointed the court granted Viacom's overreaching demand for viewing history. We are asking Viacom to respect users' privacy and allow us to anonymize the logs before producing them under the court's order."
    http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9983702-7.html


    ANONYMIZE... Google still wants to protect us by anonymizing the user data.
    • stragonubius, on 07/06/2008, -0/+0***** Viacom.
      I'd rather watch original Fresh talent than any of Viacom's Shows.
      So until such a time that the INVASION OF PRIVACY act is reverted, I'm not watching ANY television or Movies.
      Try making money off of me now, *****.
    • stragonubius, on 07/06/2008, -0/+0
      http://www.viacom.com/Contact/Pages/default.aspx

      Tell Viacom how you Feel
      Your internet Privacy May Very well DEPEND on this ruling
  • asus2000, on 07/05/2008, -0/+4Viacom General Counsel Michael Fricklas said yesterday that Viacom has no intention of going after individual users. "Even if they uploaded pirated clips, we're not going to use the data to find them. We're not going to use it to sue them. We're not going to use it to look at who they are."

    Rather, the company has argued, the data could be used to measure the popularity of copyrighted video against non-copyrighted video.

    Yesterday, lawyers for Google said they would not appeal the ruling. They sent Viacom a letter requesting that the company allow YouTube to redact user names and IP addresses from the data.

    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200807031 ...
    • HtomSirveaux, on 07/05/2008, -0/+3HORSE *****!!

      Where is your spine Google? I find my self loosing respect for them more and more.
      They should have appealed it as high as possible, to the Supreme Court if necessary. That would at least force a consensus on internet privacy.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 135 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.