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?
"Ladies and gentlemen, uh, we've just lost the picture, but what we've seen speaks for itself. The Corvair spacecraft has apparently been taken over- 'conquered' if you will- by a master race of giant space ants. It's difficult to tell from this vantage point whether they will consume the captive Earthman or merely enslave them. One thing is for certain: there is no stopping them; the ants will soon be here. And I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords. I'd like to remind them as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves." -- Kent Brockman
Sharman never complained that Google infringed on the rights of downloaders to pirate from Kazaa versus Kazaa Lite. Sharman complained that Google infringed on Kazaa's copyrights.
Whether or not Google has links to other sites that openly advocate piracy doesn't really have much to do with the Kazaa/Kazaa-Lite debate, methinks.
If Nalgene water bottles are outlawed, only outlaws will have Nalgene water bottles.
and it's still not hard to find links with kazaa lite, or anything to do with illegal nature.
a far more pressing issue for me is why doesn't google remove links for "kiddie porn" or "illegal porn" or "rape pics" or something?
or is it a case of one rule for one, another for everybody else?
Comment: Yes I realise the username 'fuckfuck101' makes me sound intelligent, no you cannot buy it from me.
in other news, KaZaA users are searching for KaZaA Lite using KaZaA itself, installing it, and getting rid of KaZaA for good!
The IT section color scheme sucks.
... click on my signature to get the cen$ored google links...
Google is a single point of failure, and the people running it seem determined to fail.
We need a peer to peer search engine. We could build it out of the current peer to peer network search engines, which all suck, BTW. I think I would put up with long-running searches for non-censored results.
One method might be to use something like Filter Proxy. This proxy looks at all the web pages you visit and indexes them. If we can share and search each others proxies, our own browsing will be the indexing of the internet, thus avoiding having to write a spider and obey robots.txt and stuff like that.
At a minimum, we need to get the project started and start using it, building up the databases.
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.
It seems that there's been a trend lately for blaming a search engine for what can be found using its services. It is not google's responsibility to maintain the content of the Internet.
... it is not their fault if some comes up.
If i search google for "Child pornography"
If I search for mp3s or full movie rips, its not their fault. They are an indexing service, not a filtering service, nor a content provider.
blah people are stupid.
no comment
Down with Saudi Arabia!!!
It's not about what is legal or not, it's about complying with a DMCA request.
Google will remove what they need to in order to avoid a DMCA dispute, the path of least resistance. Any other removals would constitute more work on their end.
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
So now instead of these sites being deep in the list of results, they are now front and center, and probably getting far more hits then they were before the notice was sent.
And probably everyone on Slashdot knows what the obvious, technically-properly-done successor is, so I won't even mention it.
Actually paying for stuff?
"Sufferin' succotash."
By this logic, SanityInAnarchy's own post would be illegal, as the post uses the exact same words that it suggests should in some way be illegal to search for or index. Once we have forbidden words we have a very small step to forbidden thought.
One can argue that the piracy should be illegal, but it's a far stretch to say that a link with any of these phrases should not exist on Google. There are invalid uses of the phrases, but there are many valid uses as well, including a group that might not wish to sell their soul to a major label and the RIAA and might want to make their "complete albums" freely downloadable on the Internet. It's a shame or worse that an RIAA mentality might hamper their ability to do so.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
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!
I just find it pretty ironic that kazaa are complaining about copyright infringement.
Furthur Network
I have a nonprofit site dedicated to japanese design.
It was number one on google. it is now blocked out, and commercial links to amazon and other booksellers come first.
Apparently there is an agreement between Google and their advertisers to give priority to their pages.
Also, don't forget that google has a well known disrespect for searchers privacy, by placing permanent cookies, and has a long lasting relationship with the Feds, providing profiling information on suspicious searches.
Proof? Well, don't google for it. Googlewatch.org is a good place to start.
--- Nothing but Blood and Kosmos
This is like demanding Enron being removed from the yellowpages. Control search engines and you control the net I guess, this is one of the bigger problems of the DMCA. Linking should not be illegal regardless of the site.
Let them fight their battles, but leave unaffiliated third-parties out of it. Google has nothing to do with kazaalite, google has nothing to do with scientology, etc. You would think a GOP administration would defend business like google and free speech, but the DMCA has yet to be challenged and Ashcroft has no problem using it for his own end.
I don't want a goverment sanitized search engine, I want the rawest information I can get.
And still the best way to get some quick warez is searching for: Name Last modified Size Description [type] ex. Try: Name Last modified Size Description Macromedia exe "Some" interesting results.