Why is Google Responsible?

Besides for the impracticalities involved (there are thousands of videos uploaded daily, imagine if each had to be screened by a human), does Google even have such an obligation. I am unfamiliar with law and the details of this case but I would imagine that uploaders to Google Video or any other video site would be required to accept that the company accepts no responsibility and any illegalities would be the responsibility of the uploader. Furthermore Google showed interest in cooperating with the law as they removed the video within two hours after being asked to. Without going into the discussion of whether or not this is an inhibition of Freedom of Speech the question to ask is: Why is Google Responsible?

Well, Google is responsible to a certain extent. Google's responsibility stems from its corporate values and the fact that even kids use it. But they also have control mechanisms and that is why they take down videos that are reported as offensive (after human screening). It is a self regulating system based on usage. If you see it and find it offensive, report it.

But this high profile case aims to pass a legislation that can so easily be misused. Who will screen? How many people will be needed to police the net? These same questions were raised for the radio and the TV and it resulted in government regulation.

As far as this case goes, there is no absolute answer here - No right or wrong. It was an offensive video, but they removed it when they received the complaint. On the basis of this doubt alone, these guys should be left off the hook. The internet is the last bastion of free speech. It needs to stay that way.

There is no threat here to the internet or freedom of speech. This isn't the groundbreaking case Google wants to make it up to be.

The two main factors of this case are this:

A) Google was asked by the individual (or a representative thereof) to take the video down.

B) Google's refusal to do so netted them a measurable amount of profit

The question this case is answering is not whether or not an ISP or hosting provider is responsible for any and all content uploaded to their servers, the question this case answering is whether or not, as an individual, you have a right to demand that your identity/image/likeness cannot be used FOR PROFIT by a company without your consent. The answer is (thankfully) a resounding 'No'.

This has been law in the US for over a century (if I have my history right). This is why Depends™ Adult Diapers cannot just take your facebook photo and use you as the new face of bladder control.

I think that an executive of a company as big and famous as Google and Google the company itself should be held to a higher standard, therefore in my opinion they are more guilty than the girl who uploaded the video. I don't think this is censoring at all, anyone can find crap like that all over the internet. That does not mean we should have it showed down our throat by a giant corporation, we got chans and American TV for that. they would take it down if it was a video of a rape or a murder, I don't see how this case is different. Google told the programmer of gaia (an open Google earth project) to remove their code from the internet, but I can't tell Google to remove a video of me? That is bullshit, I'm seeing Google morphing into Microsoft right before my eyes. My judgment: GUILTY!