Slashdot Mirror
Google in Trouble for Suggesting Illegal Software
JehCt writes "Google is being sued over the 'suggest' feature built into its latest toolbar. InfoWorld reports: 'ServersCheck, a small company that makes network monitoring software,' is complaining that, 'If ServersCheck is entered, Google generates suggested search terms such as serverscheck crack, serverscheck pro crack and serverscheck keygen which lead to pirated software.' In an apparent public relations blunder, Google claimed to have no way of filtering suggestions. However, Google can and does filter because the toolbar won't provide suggestions for keywords like 'porn'."
...that more people are interested in pirated copies of their software than their actual brand? I'm far from an expert at the workings of search engine toolbars (hate 'em), but doesn't that particular function bring up the most popular searches for that keyword?
that sounds like the politically correct way to say "i want to censor google". if people looking for their product in good faith are suggested search terms that allude to a crack, they most likely aren't going to try those search terms. if they're given results for a pirated version only, then there's an issue.
this guy sounds like he's taking it a little overboard. but you are correct, google made a mistake saying they couldn't filter them out when they do regularly filter results anyways (china's google for instance?)
please me, have no regrets.
They should stop filtering on the word "porn"
Wouldn't Google still be considered a common carrier? They didn't produce the stuff, why would they filter it.
.. if a common carrier started to filter out results that they thought were unfavorable, then they'd have to filter ALL illegal content, because then they become a delivery source.
IIRC
So why is Google filtering the stuff?
Or would they not be common carrier?
= Grow a brain...
Aggregated information is just that: information. It is not owned or copyrighted by anyone. The judge should simply rule that Google is not the one to sue, because they do not own the fact that 1000 people searched for this result.
The big problem here is the program is called Google Suggest. So basically, Google is suggesting that people should search for cracks, keygens, and other things which hurt the business of said product. Google is in no way being neutral when it "suggests" search terms.
If this gains any kind of traction, it will probably lead to the demise of the suggest program. All someone has to do is preform a few actions (create a product, website, preform searches, etc.) and then they can sue Google.
If they do manage to outlaw bringing up search results with words like "crack," won't the cracker scene just come up with some other lingo? I could write something that does the same thing and call it a "Floyd" instead of a "crack," and if that catches on you'll get just as many illicit search results for "ServersCheck Floyd." And then what, will they sue over searches for "Floyd?"
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
I think more to the point though is the one thing that people don't seem to understand about Google. They are a SEARCH engine. They don't produce the content, only make it easier to find. They shouldn't be held responsible for other peoples' criminal acts. You can learn how to make a bomb through Google as well, and you should be able to. That is one of the side effects of having the entire span of human knowledge at your fingertips. I just don't understand why companies, individuals and interest groups keep going after the messenger.
You'll have that sometimes...
Not sure why the parent is modded as funny, because its more insightful than funny. Did that company sued the ISP or the maintainer of the sites? Nope. They went were the money is.
Thats like charging someone with a crime because he knows where the neighborhood crackhouse is.
My apologies, I modded your comment -1 redundant when I meant to mod it up insightful.
At least posting this comment will zero out the effect (no means to undo the mod)
Before I part with'em: two pennies weigh ~4.996+/-0.014g, have a zinc core, and the face of Lincoln. You can keep 'em.
The 2600 decision was unconstitutional on the face of it. The first amendment lets a newspaper tell citizens where a red light district is without fear of being hauled up on pandering charges. The last 25 years have seen our federal courts loaded with pro-business, defacto right wing judges who have markedly ruled against the consumer and for more invasive corporate power.
Google shouldn't have to filter a damned thing.
Software to crack your own property is morally proper, no matter what laws the rich bastards have purchased. The "license to use, but you don't own this disk or the software" idea is manure. You buy it, you own it. That's how physical transactions work. An author of a book doesn't get to tell you how to read, store, or dispose of the book after you purchase it. Well, right now he can't. Wait a couple of years.
This is how people lose faith in the law. Make enough stupid, vicious laws to make powerful people happy, and soon no one respects the law, since they KNOW it's a scam to make powerful wealthy people happy.
I'm starting to see the end of the internet as we've known it. It's turning into corporate-controlled 21st century TV, complete with vice squads and corporate private cops busting people.
Time to start building encrypted darknet transmission systems, kids. The dark times are starting.
From the first hit using the search terms "serverscheck crack":
Shareware Connection periodically updates pricing and software information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it. Software piracy is theft, Using crack, password, serial numbers, registration codes, key generators (keygens), warez is illegal and prevent future software development.
How would you go about filtering this site? Curious.
My spoon is too big.
What's wrong with suggesting those search terms? First of all they are search terms. Searching for them isn't illegal. Getting pirated copies is. Second, some of those have dual meanings that are hard to filter. Cracks could relate to things that are not software related, how would the software know the difference? Finally, not every one of those are necessarily illegitimate. Cracks have their legitimate uses. Every gamer I know cracks their single player games that they paid for, so that they don't have to keep the cd in the drive when playing. People with legitimate copies of windows crack them so they don't have to go through the activation process every time they format / reinstall.
DMCA, yeah, yeah...That law needs to be rescinded.
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.