Slashdot Mirror
Google Publicizes DMCA Takedowns
dmarti writes "In an apparent response to criticism of its handling of a threatening letter from a Church of Scientology lawyer, the popular search engine Google has begun to make so-called "takedown" letters public. DMCA-censored pages are now two clicks and a cut-and-paste away from the regular search results."
It is good to see that privately made threats aren't as private as the bad guys want them to be. I seriously have a problem with censorship, especially when it is as blatantly self-serving as from the Church of (Battlefield Earth) Scientology. :/
Oh yeah, I want a refund for my ticket, I didn't realize that it was a fanatical religious movie when I went to go see it
It seems as though Google has realized that the majority of people using their search engine are home users, who want to find good pages with information they want. By telling people that the DMCA has resulted in the removal of said pages, it's informing the average user of what laws such as the DMCA actually mean to them!
I think its a fairly bold statement on Google's part, saying that the end user is more important than the corperate jackasses.
-agent oranje.
I've been wondering about this for a long time. They cache possibly illegal content, and are certianly distributing some stuff that the authors aren't giving them permission to, as well as possibly linking to sites which violate DMCA (and if they recieve too many letters about this, it could take forever to take down all the sites that are apparently violating the act).
It seems that Google might be breaking some of the current laws, or may break some in the future. IMHO, this is a good thing, because there are so many people who think that Google is an innocent, noble and pure search engine. The law may just be changed so that Google no longer violates it. I would certainly hate to see such a mechanism slip quietly into the night.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
Then I guess people need to start learning that if they say something in public, anyone can quote and store that. Imagine an election where a canidate can say something stupid one day and then prevent the media from publishing it again or allowing people to talk about it. Same thing here except YOU put the material on the web for other people.
The best thing about this is that the general public may begin to become informed about the DMCA and all of the stupid things that can come of it. Hopefully google will make a point to tell people that the DMCA was the reason the links are gone (read: put it at the top of the page). Possibly if enough people get pissed about the abuse of the law, and the abusivness of the law, it can either be over turned or new legislation can be passed to modify it. Or at the very least, become publicly debated and hated. That might lead to something...
The DMCA is shit as is alot of bills and laws passed in Washington these days. I thought about something when I read this.
I'm not entirely sure on this. The PatriotAct that was rushed through Congress has a clause in it stating "If you are searched because of the PatriotAct then it is illegal to make public the fact that you were searched". What would happen if the DMCA was modified like this?
Webpages and site listings disappearing overnight with no reason.
pretty scary
OMG BIG PENIS ATE MY SOUP
WHY???
Because they were following the law to the T...
They are only protected by the Safe Harbor provision if they honor the Notification letter.
And it can be simply reversed by a Counter-Notification.
This REALLY is the most logical way for this to work. It moves the responibility off of the indexer and puts it on the party publishing the information vs. the party claiming the info is copyrighted.
If "the man" ever shows up at Google's offices, they just whip out the documentation from each party and a copy of the law and say "goodday" to the badge.
---"What did I say that sounded like 'Tell me about your day?'"---
I'm not sure I could think of any other response that Google could've made that would have been any better. By doing this they protect their interests, provide information to the public about why they've taken the actions they have, and if you read the letters you should be able to figure out what site was removed! They effectively sidestep this legal manuever, expose the twits who've harrased them, and give us enough information to find the site we wanted.
:-)
:-( Score one for my favorite search engine!
Actually, it's a bit of a shame that they are hiding telephone numbers etc. on the letters in question. I understand why - to prevent harrasing calls etc. - but hey the letter is apparently public record why not expose them? Seems fair enough to me!
I applaude Google for doing this, it's just a shame I can't read the article in question
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
Actually, it's a bit of a shame that they are hiding telephone numbers etc. on the letters in question. I understand why - to prevent harrasing calls etc. - but hey the letter is apparently public record why not expose them? Seems fair enough to me! :-)
Fair, yes. B-) But also an excuse for the Church of Scientology's lawyers to demand the letter be taken down. With the contact info removed they can't hide behind a harassment claim. They must expose their REAL reason for trying to get it down: censorship of any negative information about the behavior of CoS and its members.
I'm glad to see Google standing up in this manner. One of the major problems with the DCMA is that, in order for an anonymous poster to keep his site/links up, he must expose his identity. If the web page is critical of a criminal or gang which will harras the poster with extralegal actions once they FIND him, this requirement has a major chilling effect on anonymous speech.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Try this: send them evangelical Christian tracts.
Being an evangelical Christian, I've learned the hard way (unfortunately) how easily people become uncomfortable when asked about their own spiritual lives. What these folks need, plain and simple, is for you to tell them about Jesus Christ.
It doesn't matter whether or not you succeed in converting them or not - if they convert, they'll stop being jerks, and if they don't, they'll probably get so offended at what you are saying that they'll leave you alone. The notion that an all-powerful, all-knowing God will judge the world is quite scary to many people - especially control freaks.
Granted, had I been in your situation, I might have done the same thing you did. But I believe that threatening them only reinforced their own misguided beliefs ("We will be persecuted... etc..") The knowledge of Jesus Christ is a real danger to the organization, and I believe that you could have done them far more harm by sending back a Bible than a cinder block. When people discover that God loves them, they are emboldened to break out of abusive relationships, and it is these abusive relationships on which Scientology depends for support.The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Maybe if your site happens to be one of the (relatively) few that the MPAA and its goons stumbled across. As one DeCSS "metasite" put it, though, "you have one bat and there are 100 million holes." I've had it up on my website for a fairly long time. I even have links up at some of the metasites, and Google has cached the page. I have never gotten a C&D. I'm sure the same holds true for many other sites that carry DeCSS.
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
I am running the Google Toolbar that displays the PageRank of every page you go to. The first result for a search on "scientology" is scientology's website and the second is xenu.net. However, the PageRank of the scientology site is 6/10 and xenu.net is 7/10. Am I missing something important here, or is there something fishy going on?
Scientologiests harrasing you and invading your house?
Don't call the local police: try the FBI's organized crime division, and use RICO on their ass.