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."
Is everyone actually reading the article before posting? I can't believe the story has been up this long with so few comments. :)
I love google just as much (more?) than the next guy, but does anyone think that they could use their monopoly (used loosely) of the search engine world to do things that microsoft is doing? It just struck me that really they can do anything they want and will basically control what people see, because so many people use it. I'm sure if you could mod me flaimbait and off topic, you would. =)
Get Firefox!
I'm getting sick of all the comments complaining about the moderation on certian items. Things like "Mod this one up!" from all the AC's are just a pain to sort through. Do you want the ability to mod somehting? Get and account and login.
And they want to charge me for all this too....
If SlashDot let me configure my account with a delay (so I see only stories that are X hours old, and X is configurable by me for my account), then I'd set X to maybe 6.4023 (or some other random number ) and not have to cope with sites being down from the slashdot effect so much.
If they had gave people a default random value for X, then this slashdotting effect would go away altogether for most users. People who really want the latest could configure their account to set X to zero.
fear this being modded as a troll. It's a 100% correct assessment.
Remember this is an anti-scientology story.
Only comments about all the scientologiest (did I spell that right?) being rounded up and killed are allowed.
I find it rather odd that a community like slashdot can be so small minded and petty.
I know I'm going to hell, I'm just trying to get good seats.
This whole Slashdot Effect (for you German speakers, I just mistyped it as "Slashtot", translates as Slashdead ;-) can be mitigated by Slashdot caching or proxying the small-site pages they link to in their stories. The Slashdot Effect is so predictable by now, I'm surprised nobody has sent them a bill for the over-bandwidth charges their Slashdotted personal homepage has racked up. It seems very appropriate for Slashdot's servers to buffer the load that Slashdot stories generate.
I can certainly see no real legal reason not to mirror content, and there are technological solutions aplenty for the purpose. (I submitted an Ask Slashdot on this topic, but it was rejected.) I really hate to see us all trampling the sites we flock to see
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
Opps. I wsa thinking about teh "Digital Mellinium Copywrite Act," which charges you a penny eveyr tim yuo use a year number liek 2000.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Right.
/. is about what's happening NOW. Like watching a live performance versus a tape-delay performance. It's watching the ongoing battle between the site authors and the meepts and later. If the site is slashdotted, somebody usually manages to post any relevant cached information. For a moment of glory, I think I'd gladly suffer being slashdotted.