Did Google wimp out in its battle with Viacom?
Does Google's new YouTube Video Identification tool mean it's backing down from its previous legal stance in the face of pressure from Viacom? A YouTube source told me no. He said the tool has been under development since before Google bought YouTube in 2006. It's just another effort to go above and beyond what's required by the law, he claimed. A pat recitation of the company's party line, of course. If that's true, why the sudden rollout, and why now? If Google really believed its case could stand up in court, why would it create the ID tool? How, exactly, does Google stand to profit?
My YouTube source gave me a "don't be evil" answer on this one. Google wants to act in good faith, he said. Right.
So what's really in it for Google? I've got three ideas for now.
Google stashed away an extra $100 million in legal fees as part of YouTube's purchase, fully expecting a lawsuit. It had, in other words, girded for battle. But while Google might relish the idea of taking on Hollywood, advertisers feel differently — and they pay Google's bills. They are unlikely, in the end, to welcome placing ads around infringing content, even if it's technically legal.
Finally, Google might be ready to drop its defense — that U.S. copyright law holds it's impossible for Google to know when uploaded content is infringing and what content owners want to do with it — because it realized that a database of the world's copyrighted video content could actually fit with its quest of gobbling up and analyzing all information on the planet. The ID tool only works after content owners submit their digital videos and Google crawls the ones and zeros.
Maybe you don't think copyright owners will comply. Well, it's hard to imagine how else to keep copyright-infringing content off YouTube. Content owners know this. It's one reason Viacom's Michael Fricklas already reacted positively to the news.
One irony in it all is that Google is trying also to scan all the books in the world, too. But publishers — another type of content owner — are suing to stop the process. Here a suit from another type of content owner that puts Google in a position where cataloging one more type of information in the world is Google's only option. I'm sure they're really upset about it.
Could Google actually be cleverer than it seems? This is an advanced game of chess, to be sure. But if it ends up luring content owners into its video database, in the name of keeping their clips off YouTube, maybe it's sacrificing a pawn in order to trap their king.
