Is Google Silently Removing Posts?

mrbill writes to tell us that several music bloggers believe that Google may be silently removing posts. Those especially prone to conspiracy theories think this may be a part of some greater nefarious action in cooperation with the RIAA. The LA Weekly story cites several sites and email/chat room discussion that points to the only common ground being Google's Blogger platform for sites that have had content mysteriously disappear. This still resides firmly in the wildly speculative realm of unfounded rumor but raises the question, should Google be required to notify a content creator when their IP has been deleted/removed?

Comments

What do the Terms of Service say?

[winkydink]

There should be something in there about what Google can and cannot do wrt unsubstantiated rumors and pure speculation. It think it's after the Indemnification clause.

According to Their Terms I Think They Should

[eldavojohn]

but it would certainly go a long way towards the perception of their actions as, "good form".

Actually, when they say this about content

We respect our users' ownership of and responsibility for the content they choose to share.

(Emphasis mine) One would hope that entailed at least a notice about why your posting was deleted.

Although I'm certain the RIAA has a trick for every day of the week to get content deleted instantly. Ex: Quotation of one line from a song without proper fair use attribution listed, DMCA notice sent.

I heard about this a while back....

[Anonymous Coward]

This blog had some of it's posts removed without warning or explanation.
 
"Without warning, Google removed three old posts from the blog, and offered no explanation. They then followed by removing Remix Sunday 131, and 132- and offered a brief explanation."
 
http://palmsout.blogspot.com/search/label/Remix%20Sunday

Web Sheriff

[hack slash]

Oh FFS, not those bloody clowns again...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/27/canada_rocker/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/14/prince_b3ta_dmca/
http://torrentfreak.com/village-people-hire-web-sheriff-080215/
http://stereogum.com/archives/web-sheriff-to-mp3-bloggers-happy-easter-thanks-fo_008539.html
etc.
etc.

But I've figured out a way to defeat them: someone should take Bob Marley's lyrics literally.

Re:Depends on the terms of the agreement ...

[jdunlevy]

Google's outline of its DMCA procedures for Blogger: They require complainants to "IDENTIFY EACH POST BY PERMALINK OR DATE THAT ALLEGEDLY CONTAINS THE INFRINGING MATERIAL." They also have provision for counterclaims, and when they "receive a counter notification," they say they "may reinstate the material in question." But they don't specifically say that they will notify the blogger in response to receiving a claim -- or even in removing a post.

Re:Depends on the terms of the agreement ...

[jdunlevy]

Though, in the comments on the laweekly.com story, a Rick Klau, "product manager on Blogger" does say [Feb 8th, 2009, 14:16 pm], when taking down content:

we send an email to the blogger using the address associated with their account and submit the original DMCA notice to chillingeffects.org. If a blogger wishes to challenge the DMCA notice, they can file a counter notice, at which time the original DMCA complainant has 14 days to file suit, or we will reinstate the removed content.

Terms of Use

[chicago_scott]

What entity should require Google to inform the IP holder? If the answer is the government through legislation then my answer is no, Google shouldn't be required to notify the IP holder.

If the answer is that the users of Blogger should be able to hold Google accountable for deleted or lost IP through a Terms of Use agreement enforceable by the Courts, then my answer is yes.

But the first step would be for the IP holder to not agree to the Terms of Use set forth by Google/Blogger and pressure then to change the terms of service, which state in part:

o Google also reserves the right to modify, suspend or discontinue the Service with or without notice at any time and without any liability to you.

o You agree that Google has no responsibility or liability for the deletion of, or the failure to store or to transmit, any Content and other communications maintained by the Service. Google retains the right to create limits on use and storage at our sole discretion at any time with or without notice.

Re:alphabetically challenged

[Anonymous Coward]

ZZ comes before Za in some sort orders.

It's a free service

[jalefkowit]

... and you get what you pay for.

Re:This can only mean one thing:

[Jafafa Hots]

Hey, don't knock it until you've had your rectum licked.

Re:They shouldn't be required...

[Tuoqui]

No but if these were removed via DMCA take down notices then they are legally obligated to inform the person in question.

If they were not taken down via DMCA take down notice and were infact just someone like the RIAA asking them nicely then they're 'Do No Evil' motto is starting to fall by the wayside again.