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."

16 of 341 comments (clear)

  1. About time... by blankmange · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Looks like Google is on the right track. They did kind of step on it when they pulled the Scientology links, but made up for it (kind of). Now it looks like it will take a lot more than just a threat for them to pull pages. Good move!

    --
    ...we are from the government - we are here to help...
  2. first result when search google for 'DMCA' is... by IanA · · Score: 4, Interesting
  3. Go Oogle! by Mr_Perl · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Thanks to a bright suggestion, I and probably lots of others have started linking to scientology to help bump xenu.net up in the search engine listings.

    It's now number 2 in the rankings which is 3 spots higher than a few weeks ago so perhaps this small form of protest is also working!

    --

    My poetry site welcomes the unusual.
    1. Re:Go Oogle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I just linked also. Anybody who doesn't know should go at xenu and find out what the hell is going on. The Emails between Andreas Heldal and the scientologist make a good read. they can be found under the faq.

  4. Scientology pays for sponsored link on google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It appears that the CoS pays for a "Sponsored Link" on Google. Specifically, a link to www.drugfreelife.net"
    I applaud Google for posting the letters, since posting them might piss off a source of revenue, I would applaud them even more if they would refuse to take CoS money - after all it comes from the wallets of the brainwashed.

  5. Re:Soo.... by Crash+Culligan · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Google merely posted a link to a copy of the church's DMCA warning letter, which itself links to a list of the "offending" links.

    That makes the DCMA warning letter itself a sort of circumvention device.

    Ahhhhh, sweet irony...

    --
    You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
  6. What about searches coming from Canada? by Dick+Click · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hmm. I have read a search for "site:xenu.net scientology" links to the takedown letters. When I try this search, the first hit is www.xenu.net. I wonder if this is because I am redirected to www.google.ca? Anybody have any idea if a search coming from Canada acts differently than a search coming from the US?

  7. It works, but who the hell searches like that? by mbauser2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Don't search for "xenu.net Scientology", search for "site:xenu.net Scientology". You have to include the "site" keyword. The notice is at the bottom of the results page.

    I don't think many people are going to see these DMCA notifications, because I don't think that many people search this way. If they know a given site has information on a topic, most of them go straight to the site, don't they?

    --
    Proud to be / Smiley-free / Since Nineteen / Ninety-Three
  8. Re:Let me browse SlashDot with a delay by GSloop · · Score: 4, Interesting

    OT I know.

    The ranking system for stories should prevent modding for say, three hours, so all the really good comments could have fair play for Karma, as well as just good visibility.

    It would also tend to depreciate the short "no-brainers" everyone posts in sort of a FP, but semi-thoughtout mentality.

    I can't monitor /. continuously, and find it annoying that on a subject I have some decent input, the story is already 2+ hours old, and I might as well not even bother posting comments. They won't get any moderation, and almost never any discussion. That's too bad, because it tends to depreciate the value of /. (not that there's not enough of that these days anyhow... :( )

    To recap, prevent moderation on a new story for at least 3 hours after it appears.

    I've got some other good ideas at least IMHO too, but I can't remeber them right now.

    Cheers!

  9. Hint.. by BLKMGK · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Try finding the voting record for the DMCA. Supposedly, and I've not been able to confirm this, it was passed via VOICE VOTE - no record. However when asked th elawyer who presented on the DMCA in Las Vegas at DEFCON about this he said that it had been passed normally I believe. Anyone know the real answer - and better yet have the real voting record for this damned albatross?! If I find out that ANY of my reps voted for it I can promise they will NOT get my next vote for sure!

    --
    Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
  10. DOH! Crossposted! by BLKMGK · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But what's your source? All I've ever gotten has been RUMINT and when I asked the lawyer (Dario D. Diaz* - still have his card) in 'Vegas about it he seemed pretty certain that it was a normal vote. Since he'd researched the damned thing (boat hull design provision?!) and had just given a presentation on it I figured he must know more than me and didn't argue with him. I'd love to get a definative answer on this - and better yet a voting record. Can anyone help with solid info?

    *www.fernandez-diaz-law.com is the URL on his card :-)

    --
    Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    1. Re:DOH! Crossposted! by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 4, Interesting
      A search on Thomas found this:

      The Senate passed it 99-0.

      The House held a voice vote, near as I can tell. My search ("digital millennium copyright" in the Word/Phrase search field) returned:

      1. H.R.2281 : To amend title 17, United States Code, to implement the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty and Performances and Phonograms Treaty.
      Sponsor: Rep Coble, Howard- Latest Major Action: 10/28/1998 Became Public Law No: 105-304.
      Committees: House Judiciary; House Energy and Commerce; House Ways and Means
      A search of the House site found no recorded vote on H.R.2281. So apparantly both stories are true: It was a voice vote, but the Senate recorded theirs.

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  11. Re:Agreed by blamanj · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm not sure I could think of any other response that Google could've made that would have been any better.

    I can think of one thing that would be better. If they would also create Google page listing ALL takedowns due to DMCA. It could be on their about page.

  12. Re:The Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I love how the letters show conclusively that the OT III docs about Xemu are indeed part of their Advanced Technology. You cannot believe the number of newbie scientologists who believe that Xemu is some lie that anti scientologists invented to make scientology look bad. By the time they themselves are presented with OT III by the Co$ they are already brainwashed enuf to believe anything.

    These letters can provide proof to the new people who joined scientology (before they are brainwashed) that the Co$ is indeed a ufo cult. Thank you Korbin for providing the proof proof that you are indeed a UFO cult, as well as the copyright number that was granted for OTIII. Also thanks for providing the proof of "dead agenting" and other practices of your cult.

    You gotta love it when the Co$ lawyers only end up adding credibility to the critics claims by documenting that they are indeed Co$ doctrine, and citing the source of the doctrine.

  13. Re:Will google ever get into real trouble? by Dave_bsr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1) google isn't perfect either
    2) we can still search if google goes away...
    3) um...i think this is a repeat.

    Point is, google isn't forever either. I would support them, I think they are great stuff...if they got sued I'd hate whoever sued them, just like I hate the RIAA for napster. Do I buy CD's now?

    The power of napster's public backing was not that the people would pay the court fees. it's that Napster pulled a hydra and grew some new heads, there are a million now and napster isn't even dead yet. The Point is that people HATE the RIAA now, they know that such a thing exists and that this RIAA thing took away their free music. Sales of music was up during hte time Napster was up. Now sales are down. I submit this to anyone who wants to repeat the error of the RIAA: napster cost them nothing, and it was _absolutely_ free promotion, but they killed it and made a reputation for being jerks...

    I've brought this up to people. The now know. it's truth - it spreads, and the more CoS blows its horn the more people hear of its evil. *shrug* its' their funeral.

    --


    Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
  14. Re: Hint... by kadehje · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Actually, a voice vote is the "normal method". The voices are cast, the chair takes an opinion (Of course, this opinion need not be based on the voices in the house he hears, though usually the chairperson will.) If there is any objection, an electronic vote is taken (roll call vote).
    Is it just me, or does anyone else find this blatantly unacceptable? I can understand why it wasn't done before the computer age, since if it takes 10 seconds for the chair or speaker to request and receive each House member's vote, it would take over an hour to vote on each bill by going through and asking each member whether he/she votes Yea or Nay on a bill. However, with current technology, an electronic vote should take more than 60 seconds to process.

    ABC Television has shown how easily and quickly several hundred people's votes can be tallied; it's been used so select winning videos on "America's Funniest Home Videos" and indicate the crowd's desired response to questions on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire." Install the same equipment in the House and Senate, and votes should be taken much more quickly than they are now. I'm not familiar with how electronic votes are taken now, but the few I've seen on C-SPAN usually take at least 5 minutes, often 10 or more.

    Of course this won't happen barring a constitutional amendment; obviously the politicians will keep their freedom to lie to their constituents as to how they voted on a bill by hiding it behind a voice vote. However, I think that this increasing tendancy of legislators to lie about their political actions is a very troubling sign that the U.S. Congress seems to be in the process of turing their country into a Communist state, where decisions are made in closed-door meetings that benefit only those behind those doors and where the governed people have virtually no ability to even observe, let alone change, how their government operates.

    I think that the people really need to put Congress back under the control of not just the public as a whole but also the two other branches of government. It's pretty clear that the courts are under-equipped to preserve liberty under an increasing onslaught of legislation that have to enforce. The Presidency held its own against Congress (being commander-in-chief of the worlds most powerful army is useful for that), but I could see that situation change as well if Congress continues to abuse its power of the nation's wallet, the President's power can be eroded as well, leaving the country with a political situation not unlike that of China and pre-1991 Russia.

    And don't believe it can't happen. Massachusetts offers a pretty good lesson as to what can happen when the legislative branch is allowed to effectively chop off the balls of the executive and judicial systems. The state now is effectively run by two dictators who have prevented governors from advancing any significant political initiatives since 1995. The last two governors got so frustrated with the legislature who continually prevented gubernatorial bills from even being debated and overriding vetoes that they both resigned to pursue federal positions. (No comment on Jane Swift. :) ) The dictators' response to the state supreme court regarding the unconstitutionality of not funding the state's Clean Elections (campaign finance reform) law: "Fsck you. We know the PIN number for the state's ATM card and you don't. Good luck finding money for this law." In other words, it has been proven that the state courts now only have the power to bitch and moan, and to do so uneffectively. At least the federal government could theoretically intervene if this abuse of power started curtailing people's rights. Good luck trying to get an abusive U.S. federal government to change its ways.

    For American Slashdotters, I think it's high time we go back to reading Article V of the Constitution and start trying to check Congress by creating amendments using the other method of proposing them: state legislatures. No federal constituitional covention has ever ocurred since the current Constitution was ratified in 1788. It's going to take quite a long time to get 34 state legislatures concerned enough over an issue to call for amendments in a way that bypasses the U.S. Congress. But unless this happens in the next 10 to 20 years to try to check the burgeoning power of the U.S. Congress, I'm afraid the years of the U.S. as a republic are nearing their end. The content of the DMCA and the sleazy manner in which is was enacted shows just how broken our political system is now and underscores the fact that we need to try to get everybody we possibly can, not just a couple of those who work in a white building with a big dome on top of it in Washington D.C., to understand and eventually accept these concerns over individual rights, or we'll continue to lose our rights at an accelerating rate in the years ahead.