Brazil Court Orders YouTube to Shut Down

Daniela Cicarelli and boyfriend Tato Malzoni have sex in shallow water on a public beach. The scene is filmed. Did I mention that Cicarelli is a model and Ronaldo's (the soccer player) ex-wife? So of course, in our day and age, the video makes its way on Youtube. It is the most viewed video in Brazil and the couple demand YouTube to take the video down. For every day it remains online, they want $116,000 in damages. It gets taken down but is reposted many times over and the suit drags on for many months. In December, a third suit is filed requesting that YouTube be shut down and the Brazilian court agrees to do so on January 3, 2007. Oh but Youtube is based in the United States. Houston, we have a problem.

News source: eWeek

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Seagate Confirms 1TB Hard Drive

Next Story

Oblivion Expansion Confirmed!

63 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

First of all you should except full responsibilty when your on a PUBLIC!!! beach. It wasn't private property so dont think having sex their was totally secluded. Second it didn't show anything in the first place. Last I didn't know who the **** either of the two ppl were in the video when i saw it and now i see its only made the video popular by trying to sue youtube. Their only asking for ppl to watch it by making it into publicity. They must be really stupid or it either makes you wonder if they did that on purpose.

Oh yeah... Shut down YouTube!!!! Do they not know what YouTube has become??? Demanding to shut it off is like asking the US to give up all the atomic weapons they've got!

Now... is it just me that notices how HORRIBLY this article has been titled? The court did no such thing as ordering YouTube to shut down... they just told them to take the video off and come up with a way of permanently blocking its reappearance!!

lol wth if im not mistaken youtube dont allow ANY explicit video, not even nudity so i just wonder how can a SEX video its uploaded into it

Mrmm, that must be where global warming is coming from: all these people getting their freak on in the ocean waters, causing all that increased friction, leading to warmer waters and thus global warming. Either that or it explains how our waters are getting more polluted...

lol

look at it this way, you are in the public eye and as such there is no assumption of privacy. Meaning someone could have swam out there really quietly and taped on his shoulder and asked him if he was having a good time.

That is why it is called a "public" beach...not "private" beach. Public implies unrestricted use...

There's no such thing as a secret ... and this proves it. The lesson: don't do something you just might regret if anyone else ever finds out about it.

I never heard before about Daniela Cicarelli and Tato Malzoni. But after I've read this, googled and found immediately the link to this video :)

These guys can be sure now, that more than even people will look at their ...ses

It seems the idea of 'shutting down' actually means blocking brazilian access to YouTube, makes sense since it's more of a local scandal. Anyway, the video is already old news, there's not a single person here in Brazil that hasn't seen it.

did the dude put seaweed in his pants or something to hide is boner in the end? LOL

search for Daniela beach sex on google.

As a brazillian i can say, i really HATE how brazillian court and government acts sometimes... we have so many things to care about like poverty and they're caring about this b*tch?! OMG!

Suing YouTube will sure accomplish much when the Evil Google Video Empire host it too. ;)

Just search for Daniella Cicarelli over there...

And since it has stayed on YT, that's a sign it's not offensive, and it isn't.

While I agree that in this case they are being absurd based on the fact they went out in public and did it and got caught it does raise some concerns over YouTubes ability or complete lack of ability to control its content. It won't be just this video, over the years and proobably already there will be many cases where videos are to be removed only to be re-added and this WILL be a major issue for the service. They really are leaving themselves open to being sued or shut down if they are incapable of catching and filtering the content that shouldnt be there.

Not only this case but the music and movies industry have their eyes on you tube already for the exact same reasons. Youtube, while a great service, really needs to ensure it can remove copyrighted content or footage that has previously been banned before people can lay their eyes on it or they are just leaving themselves open to lawsuits

And yeah I actually really like the site but thats reality.

Cicarelli's lawyer said that YT would be shut down, but the Court denied the information.
Court said that a filter would be created and it would deny just the access to the video (don't ask me how), and not the access to YouTube.

That would just be stupid and impractical, first of all you block one video, how do you stop others uploading it? You can't. Secondly if they block YouTube entirely, what about all the other video sharing sites? Proxies? It's a stupid idea and it wont work.

What does suing YouTube do? Makes the video a hot choice to view. I've never seen it but now I want to! # of views shall now multiply!!

Suing YouTube on 5 easy steps:
1) Get a boyfired/girlfriend.
2) Hire somebody to film having sex on a PUBLIC beach.
3) Have it posted on YouTube and get reposted
4) Sue YouTube for an unreasonable amount for unreasonable damages
5) Watch as you case is laughed at by everyone in America.

I was thinking they probably planned this myself. It would have been better if they had done it at home. Then their stupid case would actually mean something.

Dont want people seeing or filming you...dont screw on a public beach in front of everyone then...duh. If it was some lowlife hack hiding in their back garden with a camera stuck through their window i could sympathize, but this is just idiocy.

Perhaps someone should sue them for public indecency/performing an obscene act in public etc. The evidence is already there :P

I hope they got sand in their cooters. Chafe em, baby.

Yes, I find it a bit funny that they have absolutely no problem with an entire beach crowd watching them do their stuff, but if the crowd is on the Internet, it's much worse! This goes for nipslips on the Super Bowl or whatever vs topless beaches too, btw. It's no problem for even minors to see more or less naked bodies in the real world -- legally -- but it's always a problem when it's on TV or the web.

They aren't trying hard enough with this lawsuit! They should have demanded to have the entire internet shut down!!!

Exactly, don't have sex in public and you won't get filmed. But then it doesn't seem like these two are very bright to begin with.

There ya go. How can you claim damages when you knowingly do it in a public place? When you do anything in public you sort of waive your right to privacy. And even if they did have a case they should be going after the guy who filmed it. YouTube cannot control what its users post; all it can do it respond when they post something inappropriate.

Sorry, no damages, no case. Next time don't do it in public. You can't just sue because you want easy money. And it sure isn't YouTube's fault that your little video is there in the first place.

I did not know about this if its on youtube it will also be around other places on the internet so there is no point in shutting down youtube

umm perhaps I'm missing something...but they did it in a public beach, they took a risk and got caught, sure it's was wrong of the person who taped them and uploaded to YouTube, but they did do it in a public place for all to see. I don't know what is more stupid, them filing a lawsuit against been recorded doing it in a public beach, or the fact it didn't get thrown out of court :ponder:

Pretty much. In a public area, you have no right to privacy since it is basically everyone's domain. These people just want money. I'm surprised the court decided in their favor.

I think that there are probably legal documents, like EULA's, that the uploader's have to agree to. Therefore, YouTube would have covered it's own tail end and the user would be in trouble I'm sure it's something like that.

ROFL.. i love that end part

"Oh but Youtube is based in the United States. Houston, we have a problem."

edit: oh and also.. even if they do shutdown youtube (haha).. you can still post it on google video.. or yahoo video.. or anywhere on the net. It's not as if youtube is the only host of videos

well they have a cause. no one wants their secret posted on the internet for millions to see, but having the whole site shut down for their one little video is a bit too much.

obsolete_power said,
Yes but don't you see it? They are obviously jealous f-ers and they need to be shot!

You are an idiot... and I don't know ho YouTube survives with all it's illegal content.

mrmckeb said,
You are an idiot... and I don't know ho YouTube survives with all it's illegal content.

Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle. Because something may, or may not infringe on someone's copyright, it is not necessarily 'illegal'. IP laws swim in the judiciary waters of the civil courts, not the criminal ones. As far 'illegal' content (child porn, stolen corp secrets, etc) courts in the US have upheld that hosting companies are not necessarily responsible for the information that individual users post on their sites.

The DMCA sets the guidelines for IP and 'illegal' content in the US. If a complaint is legitimate, the Web host may take action to block or terminate access to the content that is being used unlawfully and/or violating IP law. This provides some legal immunity to hosting entities.

Until there is another precedent set or law passed, it is not the legal responsibility of Internet hosting companies to step in and play cop. Morally, IMHO, I feel that they should monitor hosted content (and many, like YouTube do), but I don't think they should have to legally. Now as far as embedded or linked-to content, that is a whole different can o' worms.