Slashdot Mirror
Google Removes Kazaa Links, Keeps Sponsored Links
SanityInAnarchy writes "Everyone should remember when Google removed several links that Sharman (owner of Kazaa) claimed were infringing their copyrights. At first, only real results were touched and sponsored links left alone. Well, that sponsored link was removed, but there are quite a few left on a search for 'Kazaa Lite' that, if they aren't infringing Kazaa copyrights, openly advocate piracy. Well, maybe not quite, but I still can't believe they expect that phrases like 'complete albums,' 'full-length movies,' and 'Napster lives' are to be interpreted as '100% legal.'"
When Napster did it, it was cool and unique.
When Kazaa did it, is was merely cool.
When Kazaa Lite did it, it was down to just another corporation, profiting from piracy.
Besides, last I heard, the Kazaa network is rapidly becoming useless, probably due to most everyone going "read-only". And probably everyone on Slashdot knows what the obvious, technically-properly-done successor is, so I won't even mention it.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
Of course such phrases can be considered %100 legal. Suppose you sell complete, legal albums from your band on your website. Being excluded from Google results would be quite damaging.
Also, belive it or not pr0n is perfectly legal and one of the single most profitable businesses on the Internet. "Full length movies" etc are buzz phrases from porn sites, and if Google starts filtering that too how much further is it to content censorship? For a Slashdot story I really don't like the pro-copyright law spin on this article. Terminating links for whatever reason is a bad thing. Go after the sites themselves for infringement, not search engines.
Remembering that google's motto is "don't be evil", we again see some of their rather odd decisions. First it was "pornography is alright, but hate isn't", now it's "copyright infringement is wrong, but open advertising of piracy is ok"...
hmm, could it be that "stuff that could get us sued is evil", and "stuff that we get paid for is fine by us"?
Just a thought.
Why are Google always linking to the Chilling Effects website? Why aren't they hosting the DMCA Notices themselves?
Would they still be in DMCA violation if the DMCA notice with the removed links were hosted by them?
What about Chilling Effects? Are they in DMCA violation by hosting those notices?
How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
If I post the links for Kazaa Lite downloads that Google had to remove here on Slashdot, will Slashdot get a takedown notice? If so, will Slashdot comply? Moderators, please mod this up so that it will show up in the Google/Google News search index!
a. http://www.kazaagold.com
b. http://mp3download.com
c. http://www.kazaalite.tk
d. http://www.kaaza.com
e. http://doa2.host.sk
f. http://www.k-lite.tk
g. http://www.kazaa-file-sharing-downloads.com
h. http://www.kazaalite.nl
i. http://home.hccnet.nl/h.edskes/mirror.htm
j. http://www.kazaa-download.de
k. http://www.zeropaid.com
l. http://www.kazaalite.nl/downloads.htm
m. http://kazaa.infos-du-net.com
n. http://www.kazaa-lite.tk
o. http://www.kazaa-lite.info
Please read this .
I mean following fragment:
FOR GOOGLE GROUPS, YOU MUST IDENTIFY EACH MESSAGE THAT ALLEGEDLY CONTAINS INFRINGING MATERIAL BY ITS MESSAGE-ID.
So, they bought DejaNews, they own probably only existing complete (?) Usenet archive, and NOW they want to censure it!
I don't care about links, if you want link you can find it in many places. Problem is Usenet archive. There is no other place where you can find posts from 1995 or even 1992.
Dear google, I fsck your link database, but leave Usenet archive unchanged, you are not creators of that content!