kinda bullshit

"What they are saying is that this verdict implies that they would have to pre-screen every single video that is uploaded to Youtube in order to make sure it is acceptable before allowing it to go live on the site, which is a ridiculous and unfeasible demand given how popular such sites are."

Exactly: bullshit. All this ruling states is that (just like here in the US for the last 100 or so years), a company may not use your image, likeness or identity for profit without your consent.

If you value your freedom (of speech or otherwise), you'd do well to think before you curse a law that protects the very essence of that freedom: the right to privacy.

Stop blabbering on about the internet. This case has little (if anything) to do with the internet, and Google is not the internet. Google is a for profit internet-based company. This ruling protects the rights of the individual over the interests of corporate America, which is exactly as it should be.

For Google to have won, they would've had to do one of two things:

A) Not produce ad-revenue by advertising alongside the video B) Remove the video when the person whose likeness was shown asked it to be removed

This is hardly, nay, absolutely nowhere near, the type of censorship or curtailment of the 1st Amendment that you and the rest of the GoogleFUD campaigns are trying to sell everyone. Currently, any content hosting provider (ie - YouTube) has to take down all disputed videos pending review (if requested), and no precedent was set in this case that hasn't already been set in the US for a century.

The only question that was answered in this case (and answered here in the US, again, a loooong time ago) is whether or not YOU are the IMPLICIT COPYRIGHT HOLDER of YOUR LIKENESS and IDENTITY.

Sorry to say it kids, cause I know you're trying really hard, but you have to stop believing everything the loudest voices are saying to you. Sometimes they don't have your interests in mind, but they want you to think they do.