Tuesday, January 9, 2007

No automatic MD5 check on YouTube

Read in another french article: YouTube removal process is 100% manual. Footage of Daniela Cicarelli keeps being re-posted on the site because users just change the file name.
**********


Brazil model wins YouTube battle
Footage of Daniela Cicarelli keeps being re-posted on the siteA Brazilian judge has ordered the video-sharing website YouTube to remove a clip of supermodel Daniela Cicarelli romping in the sea off Cadiz in Spain.
The ex-wife of Brazilian football star Ronaldo was secretly filmed cavorting with Brazilian banker Renato Malzoni.
The court told YouTube to find a way to permanently block the intimate video from being uploaded on its servers.
Inaction could result in a daily fine of $119,000 (£61,300), the couple's lawyer said. YouTube has not commented.

File name change
The Sao Paulo state supreme court first ordered YouTube and two other websites - Globo and IG - to remove the five-minute clip in September after the couple sued. The two other websites did remove the footage, but despite YouTube's efforts to withdraw the clip it keeps appearing on the site.
The internet is democratic and has to be defended, but this struggle is to have some level of control to avoid the violations of people's fundamental rights, like privacy and intimacy
Lawyer Rubens Decousseau TilkianAs a result Supreme Court Justice Enio Santarelli Zuliani made a new order for its permanent removal, the court's press office said in a statement.
Lawyer Rubens Decousseau Tilkian, who represents Ms Cicarelli's boyfriend, told the Associated Press news agency that YouTube had not taken sufficient action to enforce the order as people kept re-posting the clip by constantly changing the name for the file.
"The internet is democratic and has to be defended, but this struggle is to have some level of control to avoid the violations of people's fundamental rights, like privacy and intimacy," Mr Tilkian told AP.
According to Mr Tilkian, the case will now go before a panel of three judges who will decide whether to fine YouTube.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6233693.stm


No comments: