Slashdot Mirror
Google Relists Operation Clambake
DarkZero writes: "After almost every tech site and individual geek banded together to either carry the story about Google's delisting of Operation Clambake or flat-out protest it, Google has apparently relisted Xenu.net. Searches for 'xenu' and 'scientology' list Operation Clambake as the first and fourth results, respectively. The search for "scientology" also lists a story from C|Net about Google delisting Operation Clambake, as well as a protest ad from a Kuro5hin reader (oc3)." Update: 03/22 12:52 GMT by M : We jumped the gun. Google only relisted Xenu.net's homepage (where the copyright claims by Scientology were clearly bogus), not the rest of the pages listed in Scientology's DMCA complaint. Some Google sysadmin is getting aggravated because every 20 minutes, another memo from management is coming down telling him to alter the live database.
After all the money I spent to get to OT-2, you'd THINK the cult leaders^W^Wguys in charge would've sent out a more threatening letter, or at least sent it on more expensive (and, thus, more threatning) letterhead.
Guess I need to spend some more money to get to OT-3.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
Let the flames begin.
That a marginal religion such as Scientology could wield such massive power is truly a frightening concept.
This without having any serious followers in governmental leadership positions.
They thought they could control it? A program that powerful? That much computing muscle? Did they really think they could contain it?
It's alive I tell you! Alive! And it's hungry for pages to index! Tell it not to index a page, to exclude a page completely from its memory and it will certainly do the exact opposite. Bullying and threats will only provoke it! It has the collective knowledge and power of the internet to draw upon (neatly indexed, I might add)! It's unstopable!
I warned you! For years I have been speaking about the perils of advanced Search Engine technology. But mine was a voice in the wilderness. Now, the truth is revealed, but it's too late!
ITS TOOO LATE!!! ARGH...
It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
A success story for the freedom geeks! I couldn't believe the original story when I read it.. I mean do we give people the power to remove any and all criticism from the web (or from the search engines, effectively removing it from the web.) What about the number one search result for "Chevy Avalanche Reviews".. That review is definately not positive, its downright negative. Should we ban it if it makes Chevrolet unhappy?
Starsucks
# Hack the planet, it's important.
There's also following "sponsored link" appearing highlighted in nice green, when looking for the word "scientology": "Scientologist are Evil? Why is Google censoring this site? What are the Scientologist hiding? www.xenu.net:" Comes up only on some of the searches, though - so you need to click few times to get it. So, Xenu.net gets even better covarage then before Scientology started to fight it. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot .. :-)
The only thing I'm waiting now for - an official statement and explanation from Google on today's turbulent events.
Scientology is a complete fraud, but an interesting fraud. I would encourage anyone even marginally curious to take a look at the explanation of the cult on xenu.net. The Scientologists had an interesting conflict with the creators of Southpark. In a skit for the MTV Music Awards show, the South Park creators lambast Scientology and were threatened with lawsuits - yet they didn't back down. Here is the link to a description of the skit. Here. Southpark also tore into scientology in a spoof on them and street magician David Blaine. HOWEVER - note that the fellow who plays Chef does not appear in this episode - for he, Isaac Hayes, is a scientologist. Watch the episode here.
Scientology probably will wake up one day and notice that bad press isn't too good. Come to think of it, they know that in one way, that's why they are going against these sites in the first place, now if they realize that their actions are actually generating way more awareness in a week than the site alone would do in a year, if they have minimal judgment, they'll do the math and stop being high-tech bullies.
I have no clue about scientology, but interrestingly, I hear only negative thing about them on the net, I've yet to see scientology and a positive claim, that's kinda scary, if they want a positive image, it's not by going after every bitcher that they will do good, Good is done by DOING good things, but I guess we all know that....
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
I'm pretty amazed that someone so clever as L. Ron Hubbard would allow something like this to happen. I mean come on, what happened to the "softly softly catchee monkey" approach?
:-)
Surely someone who can create such a system (that controls that many people at once by making them feel elite while unashamedly robbing them blind) would be smart enough to realise that censoring anti-scientology sites just makes them more credible? Or perhaps as the clambake site suggests, he's starting to believe his own propaganda?
For me at least, I would have dismissed the clambake site as another crackpot venting steam, were it not apparently censored. Now I'm taking clambake a bit more seriously
I am artificially intelligent.
Perhaps a search on "scientology" should return a message like: Due to threatened lawsuits via the DMCA and to deal with all parties in an even-handed manner Google has removed all searches with the keyword "scientology".
So, Slashdot is making money now right? So repost the comments you were forced to remove. Let them litigate on two fronts.
If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.
for Operation Foot Bullet.)
(http://www.xenu.net/archive/footbullet/
<Nelson Munts>HA-Ha</Nelson Munts>
I just pirated Vanilla Sky!
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
I saw the Xenu ad when I was reading the previous story and I thought "wow, that's really clever!"...here's why:
Separation of editors and advertisers. Sometimes it's almost as strong as separation of church and state (although like church/state it's not absolute). In fact, a lot of sites pride themselves on the fact that editors can air stories even if it pisses off advertisers.
Well why the hell not have it work in the other direction? Why not use advertising to bypass editorial waffling or censorship?
Look at it this way. Let's say we all chipped in $5 each to create a fund to ensure that Xenu.Net showed up for every even-remotely related Scientology link (ie, Scientology, Travola, Dianetics, Bukkake, etc). Now, does Scientology have the legal right to tell Google they can't run those ads (thus depriving Google of its income). Couldn't Google argue that pulling ads that have been paid for would damage its business?
What about extending the principle to other sites like Yahoo, or heck the NY Times. The way I see it, all Scientology could do is threaten to boycott Google/Yahoo/NY Times...they routinely ignore boycotts from groups all the time. Or they could pay to run ads countering the Xenu ads.
Well of course I don't know for sure if things would be this simple but...you know, why can't we geeks take a page from the Corporate Dirty Playbook...fight with advertising.
I'm all for giving money to the EFF but I think I would almost rather spend my money creating an ad campaign...along the lines of TheTruth ads you see against the tobacco industry. I mean, even smokers curse Big Tobacco out the side of their mouth as they buy another pack. The Tobacco Industry has a PR nightmare...so why can't Disney or Scientology or the MPAA or RIAA?
I've got $20 right here I'll pitch in.
- JoeShmoe
.
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
Nope, they'll never wake up. Hubbard himself made a rule about this: Never Defend, Always Attack; Scientologists do what Hubbard says. Scientology does things that generate bad press so often that their oposition has developed a name for it: foot bullet. The Scientologists keep shooting themselves in the foot over and over and over, and they can't stop, because Hubbard himself told them to do it.
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Danny.
I have written over 900 book reviews
is it possible?
....
If everyone who has a webpage creates a link to xenu.net then won't that boost Xenu.com's ranking on Google? Then if someone searches for Scientology Xenu would appear first
To Google (after I read the /. story):
- 1& oe=ISO-8859-1&q=dmca).
I am highly concerned about the recent slashdot.org story that your company has recently removed scientology information from your index, select pages from xenu.net and operation clambake.org. It shocks me that all it takes is one letter to knock an opposing voice out of the arena. This will seriously ruin your search engines reputation, especially in the 1st ammendment society we live in.
From Google:
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 23:20:31 -0000
From: "The Google Team"
Subject: Re: xenu.net delisting. [#201603]
To: "Electrawn"
Thank you for your note about the Xenu.net website.
Google takes the first amendment very seriously. We are also obligated to
follow the laws of the land. We removed some pages of the Xenu.net
website from our search engine earlier this week in response to a
copyright infringement notification under the Digital Millenium Copyright
Act (DMCA). It is not within our discretion as a company to decide when
to conform to the DMCA and when to ignore it. As the DMCA mandates, Google
also provides webmasters with the ability to have their content reinstated
if they submit a counter notification to Google. Until that action is
taken, we will comply with the DMCA and keep the contested pages out of
our index. If you'd like more information on this topic, you can find it
here:
www.google.com/dmca.html or by searching Google for "DMCA"
(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859
We appreciate your interest in this issue and your taking the time to
express your opinion.
Sincerely,
The Google Team
Overall, Google is handled this in a poor, timid manner. First, one of Google's lawyers (seemingly by himself) decided there might be some liability to Google so they should de-list xenu. Only after xenu was de-listed and Rotten (among others) wrote a story about it, did Google reconsider. Google is a relatively small company and not looking to get involved in some ideological dispute over scientology or the DMCA. They are vulnerable to bigger entities in the legal arena. As a result, what they are doing is providing a means to copyright holders to complain about offending material. The means of complaint is basically a legally binding affadavit throwing the liability back at the complainer(?) to provent frivolous complaints.
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -- Carl Sagan
Well, well, well... upon hearing this news, my first thought was of disgust - disgust that Google would help Scientology censor xenu.net into oblivion. However I couldn't help but wonder... who leaked the news to the media? If it was Google who informed the media about this while complying with the law, then I must admit it's a nice way to stir up the controversy and to inform people who/what Scientologists are really like. So.. who leaked? :)
While lurking around on Xenu.net, I saw that there's a petition to ask the DOJ to investigate the Church[sic] of Scientology. I signed it. How about you?
DOJ Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/cofs1/petition.html
Getting on the soapbox for a second to rant a bit(since everyone else is doing it, why not?)
A comparision was made between Scientology and Al-Quaeda earlier on in this forum. Please! Let's be realistic here... Al-Quaeda isn't that bad! :) At least they're honest when they say "Death to America!" while trying to kill you. With Scientology... well... they infiltrate. They smile and pretend to be your friend while reaching for your wallet. They play with your emotions. If you catch them in the act and try to speak out about it, they try (and usually succeed) to destroy your life. This is even in their DOCTRINE for crying out loud! They're the ultimate mind-fuckers.
From dictionary.com:
terrorism Pronunciation Key (tr-rzm) n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
So... if Scientology doesn't fall under this definition, just what IS terrorism anyway?
While it appears clear that Google caved in to PR pressure (site author Andreas has stated he didn't counternotify the DMCA notification), the victory seems to only pertain to the home page and not to the dozens of other urls cult lawyer Ava Paquette cited in her original complaint - which of course leaves the material on those pages unsearchable. Google probably made an 'executive decision' to allow the home page, since there isn't a single thing that could deemed a copyright violation on that page.
However, Google is still allowing Paquette to exploit a contradictory flaw in the DMCA by honoring the rest of the complaint. (I tried searching about 15 other links directly on Google, and all came up dead - so I can't say unilaterally that Google is blocking all of the urls, but they're at least blocking all 15 of a random sampling.)
The key contradiction within the Act itself appears to be the vastly different indemnity offered to ISPs versus that provided for search engines, or as the Act refers to them, "information retrieval tools." Under the DMCA, once notified of links to infringing content, a search engine is required to disable access to the material in question pending a counternotification from the accused infringer - which was what was demanded of the xenu.net site author despite the fact that such a counternotification would have required a citizen of Norway to submit to the jurisdiction of a US federal court.
However, in a recent ruling dealing with the liability of AOL, a court found just the opposite: as an ISP, it was protected from liability for providing "transitory digital network connections" to allegedly infringing material, and not obliged to remove such links even if explicitly informed of their existence. Ironically, ISPs, who are arguably more directly in control, as it were, of third party material hosted on their servers, are granted more protection for "transitory" access to infringing material than search engines, whose very raison d'etre is to provide such links which are inherently ephemeral, and hence transitory, by nature, as they are the result of specific queries, and do not exist on a permanenty accessible single page.
This basic contradiction within the DMCA puts the onus on search engines to maintain by hand the results of their automated search process, and respond to any and all DMCA complaints, regardless of the location or even continued existence of the page to which the link directs the user.
It's clear that this loophole presents rapacious copyright owners with a new tool with which to combat any and all use of their material, but as seen in the case of xenu.net, it can also be used as an alternative to launching a suit by copyright owners whose goal is not the protection of their property, but the silencing of critics.
Google's DMCA disclaimer page says " Please note that you will be liable for damages (including costs and attorneys' fees) if you materially misrepresent that a product or activity is infringing your copyrights." Is Google prepared to sue the Church of Scientology? After all, misrepresention is most certainly what has occured, and only after Google suffered a major league PR asswhomping did they, upon further reflection, decide that the home page was not a copyright violation.
So while Scientology lost the major battle (their intention was and has been for some time the removal of all critical content from Google, and especially xenu.net from the top ten), they still managed to win lots of minor skirmishes - forcing the xenu.net site author to respond to dozens of specific complaints, nearly all of them barratrous (which I believe I can opine, being familar with the specific content on those pages, each of which adheres to the bounds of fair use). And because Scientology's newfound weapon found limited success, we can be sure we're going to see it again and again. This is far fom over and unless Google takes a stand, they will be abused badly.
An earlier example of attempts to stifle linking---relevant not only here, but foreshadows e.g. the 2600 DeCSS case. Excerpt:
'In article 15, the plaintiffs state that a so-called 'hyperlink', a reference to the location of another document, is also to be considered as "publication and/or duplication by the user and the provider". A hyperlink is nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, more than a description of a location that can be activated. Plaintiffs' statement is the same as saying that a library or the writer of a book can be accused of duplication and/or publication because they publish the name, number and location of a certain book or article in a footnote, a bibliography or in an archive entry...
A hyperlink refers to a location. Hyperlinks regularly refer to other hyperlinks. The whole WWW is nothing but a complicated conglomerate of hyperlinks and files. Are all these systems breaking the law in plaintiffs' opinion? Should the whole WWW be indicted whenever there's a document available somewhere that is illegal in plaintiffs' opinion?
A hyperlink does not formally add anything. The publication is a fact as soon as the page is on Internet. Making the document available can only be considered as publication and/or duplication when the number of potential users is increased by this act. But this doesn't apply to Internet, because all users already had access to the files, they just didn't know where to find them yet. Making a catalogue (which is what hyperlinks are basically about) means making data easily accessible. In my opinion, that is not illegal.'
The fact is that google are one of the few if only companies willing to stand up to the COS, they have deep pockets and lots of lawyers and they throw lawsuits around like confetti.
I encourage everyone to read the Clambake Site and the linked documents, and i would reccomend the books linked from it - Particularly the following
A piece of blus sky - subject of a massive lawsuit - the inside story of the church written by a former scienologist himself.
L Ron Hubbard - Messiah or madman - learn the truth about the nutcase named ron
Theres many more and i encourage you to read them.
This is a church that robs its clients, asttempted to take over the british mental health system, pretty much took over the town of Clearwater, performs feudal punishments for transgressions,may have been involved in a number of murders, were caught systematically spying on the US govt including breaking into the IRS and copying court documents and much more. (read about the Sea Org, their very own navy)
they dont play games and they harrass people who go against them in ways you cannot even imagine and they have billions of dollars in money and assetts.
Read about them and learn the truth but be very carefull, these guys are very serious customers.
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
The Scientology cult has made systematic attempts at removing any links to negative websites -- both by creating a large collection of interlinked websites of their own (thereby raising their own propaganda sites in the rankings), and when that wasn't sufficient -- legal threats.
Slashdot participants are in a unique position here to turn the tables on the cult by adding a link to http://www.xenu.net to all the websites we run. If enough of us link to www.xenu.net, we can make it the #1 resource for information about Scientology! (remember that Google's cache uses the number of referring websites to determine the ranking of listings in search results).
Alex Berkman
They're brave enough to mock anyone in power and put total strangers on the spot, but the CoS is just too risky.
"So every day I see the sign: free IQ test & analysis"
Yeah, pretty accurate test.
If you walk in to enquire...
...you failed!
graspee
This report is false. Google is still censoring Operation Clambake, they have just relisted the root URL.
5:55 am gmt and /. is back after a few minutes of downtime.
/. /. ?
Scientologists
Or did they attempt to "set it up the bomb" ?
graspee
Here's the link.
The ad was bought by Kuro5hin user oc3. Apparently his actions were quite popular.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
I can't really tell the difference between Scientology and Christianity
I ordinarily wouldn't respond to a post so wildly divergent from topic, but I consider the insightful mod you received as my personal go ahead on the part of /. moderators to engage you in this discussion.
The question between us is, what do I understand that you do not, what are you capable of understanding, and what are you willing to understand. The very question betrays an incredible ignorance with regard to religious matters whose sheer scope defies response. The only way I could compare it would be to hold modern atheists responsible for the Stalinist purges or Pol Pot's killing fields because they were atheist regimes. One given to applying blame for evil in the context of stereotype might well make such accusations.
This brings us to the matter of what I think you are capable of understanding. Since I believe the condition to which I referred above is a matter of decision on your part rather than reason, I think you could understand much if you chose to acknowledge that others have as much right as you to decide what is important to them.
As for what you are willing to understand, I fear that you, like all bigots, have chosen not to understand for fear of facing what that understanding might mean. I certainly invite you to human fellowship and tolerance, but I don't expect it.
2x !
;)
go search 'scientology' on google and it clambake / xenu.net comes up twice on the right hand side in addition to showing up as #4 ranking!
cancel your earthlink service now and vote local ISP
Old age and treachery almost always overcome youth and skill.
Don't forget.. Scientiology fought against the IRS in teh 80's... AND WON!
Anyone who can fight against the IRS and win is something that *only* a large gov't wants to tackle with.
Actually they eventually lost and had many of their senior members including hubbards wife sent to jail, you see the way they were winning was using spies to break into and copy the IRS's documents and give them to them, they also did the same thing against the justice department and other departments.
Some religion hey?
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
I went to the local Church of Scientology in Vancouver once. We had to do a research report on religion. Ironically, I chose Scientology (which isn't even a religion, although it worked for the purposes of this paper). I was actually inside the "church". I said I wanted to learn about it, and they took to the back into a little room. Quite scarry actually, they said they were going to show me a video. The lights went off, so it was completely dark. Then the movie came on in front of me on a gigantic projection screen. It all started off with spinning stars like you're spinning and travelling through space...weird stuff. Then there was some narration (I think it was supposed to be Ron L. Hubbard, or an imitation of him). Then later on, John Travolta said a few words. What a wacko he his. The whole thing was a gigantic brain-wash. After the 30 minute video I felt like I was really struggling to believe that it was all a joke. I knew it was, the video just really does a good job at brain-washing you though. But after I got home, and had time to think about it, I knew it was all a scam. So I'm glad that clambake is back up, to help expose the scam that scientology is. And even if you are curious, do not walk into a Church of Scientology! The people there are very convincing! Not just the video, but the people are very persuasive and they try not to be too pushy at the same time. They just give you a few tame brochures to read, and tell you to come on by if you have any questions. If you're not as strong as I was, you might get dragged in. Don't take the chance...
...I think Google should counter-file. This would be in their best interest: They really should be considered a library, or a common carrier. Otherwise, Google just admit that they are responsible for any site they index and cache. And this is probably not what they want. IANAL of course.
And anybody dumb enough to write these guys a letter or an email can look forward to being hassled for the rest of their lives by scientology mail, phone calls and personal visits, thats assuming they dont just sue them for their trouble.
/. users who see them selves as white knights and crusaders. Unless you are prepared to be attacked, lose your ISP, maybe your job and carerr DO NOT mess with these people lightly.
These guys play for keeps - read the xenu.net site, you dont provoke them for fun as they WILL destroy your reputation and your life, they think nothing of spreading false stories about people being criminals and or even child molesters.
They are a dangerous group of people and you should carefully investigate them before taking them on this is not an example of MS suing someone or a hacker being charged - this is a group who broke into the IRS and copied files, who have been accused of murder, false imprisonment and brainwashing, have been banned as illegal in a number of countries.
SO- a warning to the
They have some very educated and technically skilled people so be carefull and make sure ANYTHING you do or say against them is done anonymously.
And i can speak from experience,i lost an ISP account for posting certain comments to newsgroups about them and a really nice cease and desist letter. I have moved 5 times and i still get mail from them, i dont know how they do it but they have to have sources inside australia post to get it (im an aussie) and that means they can track you - im sure they do in the US.
I dont recommend the experience and everything i do know is thru anonymous sources.
You have been warned -dont mess with them.
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
and all this about a church that was started on a bet between two sci-fi writers.
"We are not tolerant people. We prefer drastically effective solutions"