Slashdot Mirror
Google To Block Piracy-Related Terms From Autocomplete
An anonymous reader writes "Google is making changes in the way it presents web search results to try to exclude links that may be tied to pirated content. In a move enthusiastically praised by the RIAA, Google says it will not include terms closely associated with piracy from appearing via autocomplete. The company acknowledged that it can be hard to know what terms are being used to find infringing content, but 'we'll do our best to prevent Autocomplete from displaying the terms most frequently used for that purpose.'"
Google can kiss my shiny met.. ....!
Is torrnet on that list? I know allot of good uses for torrent.
O.o
*anything* torrent
Especially if they bury the links to torrent sites. I was looking up how to fix full screen for metro 2033 for a friend that couldn't get it out of windowed mode and gave up after more than half the links were to various torrent sites.
It's true! I went to type in 'constitutional hi-jacking', but it didn't auto-complete. When I hit the search button, I got back a bunch of results about fascist corporatism.
I can see this directly leading to Google becoming very slightly less popular for search. There were many good reasons to use AltaVista back in its day..
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
Arrrr!, walk the plank and shiver me timbers?
then i am to start using other search engines for these searches. lets see what will win. pagerank (tm) or freedom of information and knowledge. i think it will be the latter. even with altavista, i was finding what i wanted. it wont hurt too much for it to take it slightly more time.
Read radical news here
Now they will have to actually type out their coppywrite infringing query. Well thanks alot google for making illicit deeds slightly less convenient.
This move makes them look like a lapdog shill. The bigger they get, the more they are learning they have to play ball with the politicians and mafiaa in order to please the other plutocratic overlords. Moves like this help them stay out of the legal crosshairs and keep friends in high-places (back scratching deal making kind of places).
Seriously, since when is linking to data crime! It seems like we are seeing more and more stories with asshats lawyers and lobbyist and congressfucks who think this way. God forbid hosting it, but linking to it? Get real. Idiots.
'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
Now that Google is proving the feasibility of removing piracy-related terms from Autocomplete, the obvious next move by the ??AA will be to insist (or get their legislators to write laws insisting) that the piracy-related terms produce bad or no search results.
I did a search for torrent on goggle the second link goes to a piracy site. I did the same search on Altavista and the top ten results a different torrent clients that I can use to utilize said torrent that I am interested in. Given the term I would say the Yahoo result is more relevant. So maybe google is just trying to keep its searches relevant all while spinning the change in a positive light for a few specific industry interests?
There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
I quit using Yahoo back in the day because it impinged on my give-a-damn. Too many ads, not enough do-what-I-want simply, quickly, or silently. Google's bare bones front page was exactly what I wanted in a search engine.
Is there any sort of replacement for Google in that same vein? A bare bones search engine I can set as my home page and expect not to be impinged on by irritants like someone else deciding what I may search for?
Also, does it mean anything for the non automated search function of Google's HTTPS feature?
..because I find Google Autocomplete to be bloated and annoying. Many of the changes they've made to their basic search page are bloated and annoying, too. I shouldn't have to wait for some javascript crap to load up and run just to do a basic web search. The new image search is OK though.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Google's famous for proclaiming that their policy is to not be evil.
They're associating strongly here with the RIAA and MPAA, organizations which are widely considered to be evil, and making decisions based on their input.
I'm not going to say flat-out that Google's being evil, and breaking their ethics policy, but if you lie down with pigs then you may well come up covered in mud...
In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure dome decree
I see that Google also eliminates the word 'porn' from its auto complete...but when you complete it yourself and hit 'enter', results are shown instantly.
Given that consumers of pirate stuff always know what they want, I submit that Google's idea will be as they say, 'dead on arrival.'
"The" is often used to find pirated content. Will it be removed from Autocomplete?
I'm trying to search for "Pirates" because I want to pay for the Johnny Depp trilogy, but I'm not getting any results...screw it, I'll just download it.
...accurate search results.
Hiding stuff -- for what ever reason -- makes your search results inaccurate. Other search engines will be getting more business because the internet treats censorship the same way as it does damage. Sorry, but it's true. This is like trying to prevent water from flowing downhill.
All they need to do is block all major movies and records and artists from autocomplete.
In fact, they should remove them from search results altogether--why, that would send the MAFIAA into paroxysms of joy, right?
expandfairuse.org
NOTE: I'm using the https search option on a verizon wireless connection.
If you type in "how to pir" it won't finished with "pirate music".
BUT if you type in "download", "download free music" and "download limewire" are the 2nd and 8th autocomplete entries, respectively. And if you type in "pirate", it give a sponsored link from The Pirate Bay in autocomplete!
I have no idea what they're talking about--does it not apply to secure searches? I honestly can't think of any more blatant search terms to include.
for interference with my research on a bestselling biography on Anne Bonney.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Every journey to evil has a first step...
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
This seems pretty reasonable; when you search for the name of a popular movie (for example), " torrent" is almost always one of the top autocomplete hits, and the results you get from that are usually garbage or worse. There's probably a ton of people getting trojans and viruses, or scammed, by these sites by mis-clicking. They're not making it any harder to access this stuff intentionally, they're not being filtered from the actual search results.
This will be a successful plan because Google's previous blocking of pornography-related terms from autocomplete was a spectacular success at preventing people from finding pornography.
My postings are informational and does not constitute legal advice. Act on it at your risk.
Guys, Google's not changing their search results. Just words that show up in autocomplete.
So if, for example, you start typing "call of duty 7 cra", it's not going to offer "crack", but it will offer "crazy", "crap", etc. Anyone looking for a crack is going to take the extra second to type it out and press enter. This isn't actually going to deter anyone.
It won't even affect it - It's only autocomplete, not the search itself.
Basically all this means is that the freeloaders (I prefer not to use the term pirate) will need to type 'torrent' manually instead of having it pop up magically. Big deal... given the lengths some of them go to already an extra eight keystrokes (including the space) isn't going to dissuade them one bit.
Google can't magically stop people using the terms outright as it would affect a lot of other searches as well. For instance, someone searching for a water torrent stock photo... Google isn't doing anything to affect that.
AltaVista didn't even have autocomplete, IIRC, and they've not said anything about it changing search results at all.
I'd like to point out that this is *ONLY* autocomplete. They're not doing anything about search results, but they're preventing copyright infringement-related terms from appearing in autocomplete - RTFTitle.
As most slashdotters have probably noticed, they do the same thing for pornography. Searching "midget fis" doesn't suggest anything, but there are 71k results for "midget fisting" (isn't it terrifying?) if you just go ahead and hit enter.
Frankly, Google's autocomplete shouldn't be the reason that an otherwise non-infringing person finds out about thepiratebay.org. IMHO, this is a good thing.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
It never asked me if it could copy my stuf !! Never asked me if it could reproduce my photos !! Never asked me to even bend over !! Teh Google IS EVIL, make NO MISTAKE !! It WILL EAT YOU UP AND SPIT YOU OUT all for 1/20th of 1 cent.
>The company acknowledged that it can be hard to know what terms are being used to find infringing content
They could start with the names of all currently showing films and current chart singles. I'm sure the MPAA and the RIAA would be just thrilled.
since they are not only intimately associated with piracy issues, they force many into it.
Wouldn't it just be simpler if they just got rid of autocomplete altogether?
im WARNING them over this change, as a customer. they may have changed only autocomplete. fine. but, im making my opinion known, in case they may err in changing more stuff.
Read radical news here
I just typed "avast ye mateys" and it still appeared in the autocomplete.
dnuof eruc rof aixelsid
To be fair, it does make my heart sink a little when I see a movie or album and the words "torrent" or "megaupload" tacked on the end of it. Don't get me wrong I oppose RIAA and everything it stands for, but people can search for it themselves if they want it that badly.
This matters because no one here has auto-complete disabled. We're blocking ads and LSOs and such, but we rely on auto-complete to simplify our lives. Nothing to see here, move along.
Everyone here seems to be down on this - but not me. You see, I've been having trouble with Google lately. I keep turning instant search off in my preferences, yet after a day or two it somehow magically turns itself back on again. Thanks to this announcement, I now have a solution to my problem.
From now on, no matter what I want to search for - the first thing I'm going to type is "1080p". Because this should trigger the disabling of autocomplete (and therefore instant results), I can then reliably type my real query in peace. Then all I have to do is delete that leading 1080p and hit return - víola!
#DeleteChrome
So it shows suggestion because it's popular search term. What they are going to do is mess with those popular search stats and provide you a filtered - distorted result.
How long before they start doing this for actual search results? Filter out or downrate torrent sites? Even legal torrent sites (some say there are some)?
How long before this extends to a broader application like censorship of non-US-friendly sites?
I just tried "keelhauling", "scurvy", and "buggery" and all were auto-completed just fine.
sic transit gloria mundi
So any links containing the terms "arrrr", "matey", or "ye scurvy dogs" will now be blocked?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I can't believe that this point hasn't been made yet: the reason for leaving torrent out of autocomplete is to prevent the knowledge of torrents from spreading. They don't want normal, non-geeky people seeing the word "torrent" next to their favorite song, clicking it out of curiosity, then learning about the wonderful world of file-sharing.
This isn't about existing torrent users. It's about slowing down the creation of new ones.
...that their efforts have paid off and piracy is down, since their highly-paid search-hounds find far fewer sites with pirated content these days.
If Google allows you to search for The Hurt Locker torrents, okay, it's being a dumb service and performing its standard operating according to your explicit parameters. If it auto-completes The Hu with The Hurt Locker Full DVD Rip Torrent, well, now it's gone from performing its standard operation at your request to actively suggesting things you *might* look for. Allowing you to search for infringing content is safe, but there could be liability, or at least litigation, when the service starts making suggestions.
meh, it doesn't even work with encryption anyway. All you nerds are using encryption....right? :)
I can't express how sick I am of all this copyright and "OMG Piracy!" bullshit. It's like a second coming of the war on drugs.
That didn't work for 30 years, this won't either. You will not be able to stop it no matter what.
It is now to the point, that if someone were in my company and were to let slip that they were an employee of the **AA groups, or any other copyright group, there's a very good chance I would maim or dismember them... or both. Damn the jailtime. It would be worth it.
Hear that you completely dysfunctional fucktards? You are now the nerdy quiet kid in the class who nobody likes because you think you're better or smarter than everyone else. Not the dorky geeky kid who actually *IS* smarter than everyone else, but the one who has a 99 IQ and talks big all the time. You deserve to be bullied. You deserve to fail. Your institution deserves to die a fiery and horrible death, along with anyone who runs it.
FUCK YOU, recording industry. FUCK YOU, movie industry. FUCK YOU, software giants. /angry rant
If your products aren't selling, it's not because of piracy, it's because you've turned all your customers to hating you and there's few people left to be your consumer sheep.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
eyepatch, pegleg, canon, parrot. Arrr!!!
Well this is a very good idea by google but Is anyone else getting really cheesed off with google instant? I keep turning it off but it seems to just keep coming back and i don't know how to get rid of it. I dislike it because when i type it just puts me off as i am used to the old google the one we all knew for years. I think it was working well without this new silly google instant being introduced. Then again you know the saying ( If something is working and going well DON'T change it) i thing that applys to google instant. I'd like to know if it's annoying anybody else? Give us your thoughts.
Information doesn't want anything, of course, as far as the word is normally understood; it's argued that the idea that everything that is, is, in essence, information, is, in part, that which makes the "information age" different/interesting, especially when things like music and movies are, by time/technology, presented as information one can easily manipulate, share, copy, e.c. In this way, if the only wars that have ever been fought have been wars for information, it makes sense that the movie/music companies feel as though they're being attacked. But it's rather like a bad dream, where no matter how thick the will surges, one punches as though under water - and it ends up looking like the silly death dance of an expiring culture. Science almost demands that thinkers regard everything as information; normal, non-thinking people, including those who sell movies/music, will now have their chance to contribute to the discussion about what stuff is. I'm learning lots from the discourse, but the whole thing makes me grumpy!
... the Mafia being to be removed from the "Organised Crime" index of the yellow pages, but being left in the white pages? It won't stop people who really want to contact the Mafia from doing so, it'll just result in them generating less attention (which is probably what they'd like). I wouldn't see this a good thing if I was the MPAA/RIAA.
The beginning of the end for Google. No matter, search, DNS, etc. will all need to be decentralized soon. The immanent censorship of the internet will force those who desire freedom to the fringes -- as has occurred time and again throughout history.
If they're trying to innovate more efficient ways of searching for information, I personally don't believe adding bloat like AutoComplete and page previews is the way to go. They should instead focus on allowing new ways to filter information, based on how we humans perceive the information we're looking for.
I realize that the statement above is kind of vague, so here are some hands-on examples of what I'm thinking of:
These examples just go to illustrate that there are still lots of new ways to optimize the search experience.
Well, I believe a dagger has been struck into the very heart of internet piracy. Sweet RIAA, rest easy my noble lords. Piracy is no more.
"In the absence of the ability to establish the attribute of truth they tried to establish the noble attributes."
This is a bad idea. The content cartels are not going to be satisfied by this reasonable accommodation. What they will do is use it as a hammer. "Aha, you censor auto-complete. That is an admission that X terms lead to piracy. Now you should censor them in all search results."
Look at the Viacom v. Youtube lawsuit. The content cartel doesn't give a fig for reasonable accomodations, they would squash all innovation where it might impact their bottom line.
Now, the DMCA does provide some Safe Harbor protections to Search Engine providers, but that can be defeated (by knowledge, inaction, etc.) And nothing presents policymakers (judges, legislators) from pointing to Google's admission regarding the keywords as evidence that the Copyright system needs changes.
Pretend I said something meaningful or insightful here.
My glace at the headline read Privacy, not piracy. C'mon Google, get it right.
There's more to it than this.
They've been doing this with logged-in users for at least a year now. But yeah pretty creepy. That's why I plan to migrate away from Gmail.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
So that means no more referencing to Google when comparing ThePiratebay/etc. that they are basically the same service.
Go on with your lives, don't be so materialistic and learn to live without the crap. Just means more incomplete, userless and virus ridden torrents... oh nooesss.
It's amazing how many double standards money can buy.
Now they can start applying their new skills here in the US.
I stopped using search engines years ago - they're such a crutch. you wish you were as l337 as me.
i will have to tag vi4gra with an a now, what a dumb idea AGAIN, i suppose anything that keeps ri'diots r us'aa happy is welcome
beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
I almost feel such a change would make google search histories more damning in court (not that they've actually been used, but you never know what might happen in the future), seeing as no one could argue that they were just clicking an autocomplete term - in fact, with the lack of such, one could claim there's willful intent to commit copyright infringement
Downloading is NOT copyright infringement. Everything is "copyrighted" on the web. Even the google home page!
So, if downloading copyrighted material WERE infringing, we could make it really simple and just close the internet.
As a corollary, there is nothing wrong with searching for material, and including terms like "torrent", or "bittorrent".
Not the slightest hint of illegal. NOT THE SLIGHTEST.
Downloading is... just downloading. Searching is... just searching. Copyright infringement is copying a work without permission of the copyright holder.
Let's bring this back to web pages -- it is perfectly legal to DOWNLOAD that web page, but may not be legal to copy the bits and store them on your hard drive. It is perfectly legal to DOWNLOAD that web page, but may not be legal to print out a copy.
Interestingly, if the page has "Copyright (c) year, some person / All Rights Reserved", or NOTHING on it, a strict interpretation of copyright would lead to the above. Since browsers make a COPY in the ordinary course of operation, and the web site content provider is (should be) aware of this behaviour when preparing content, it can be argued that, at least, that copyright was granted. In other words "All Rights Reserved" makes no sense in the context of the web. This applies further to other downloaded content.
It is perfectly legal to download, as long as further copying is not engaged in (actually, in Canada, you can download music, and then further distribute as well, under certain circumstances).
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
Sorry for the reply to myself.
It occurs to me that an example is in order.
Imagine an artist creates a piece of performance art. A photocopier, with a pushbutton that is simply marked "for content, press me". The input to the photocopier is sealed by being screwed shut, and a single page is loaded, ready to be copied.
You press the button, and a copy is made. Out roles a sheet that says "This work is copyrighted, and All copying rights are reserved". Behind the curtain is a government official, hiding.
You press the button, and find yourself arrested, and have to pay a $750 fine.
(If I were building this, I would simply write that on the paper)
What is interesting is the concept of "automatic copyright" introduced in 1976. If copyright had to be registered, a person MAY be expected (it would be difficult, but may be possible) to search copyright status and allowed rights prior to taking an action.
With the "automatic copyright", the only legally correct action is NOT TO PUSH THE BUTTON. But, what if the button said "For content, push me. I give you permission to push me." I argue that a transitive copyright has now been granted, especially since there is no other way to determine copyright status.
In other words, downloading is legal.
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
It is too late to start a fork?
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
Meh, I turned it off as soon they released it. Useless.
There is a war going on for your mind.
"Free" is often related to pira^H^H^H^H copyright infringement.
This is good and google do look to improve there way of doing things that's why they are by far the best search engine and i think this is another great idea but i really do hate google instant it's so irritatingly annoying. It's a shame all the other search engines don't follow googles example and clean up there websites for better searches for people.
Information doesn't want anything
Of course it doesn't, but the statement "information wants to be free" is like the statement "water wants to seek its own level" or "a helium balloon wants to float".
I'd rather say that when information isn't free, neither are you.
Free Martian Whores!
Not with a bang, but a whimper.
Google is reduced to a front-end for eBay, Amazon, Wikipedia, et al.
And any government or other entity with anough power will compel them to just not tell us what we want to know, no matter the reason or legality.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
I attempted to post some comments discussing censorship on the Google Policies blog post in a civilized manner, and I believe they removed two of my comments, ironically censoring me from discussing censorship. I even took screenshots of my posts and had friends online check to verify that they were in fact going up, and then getting were removed within a few minutes without any notice. After repeated attempts, my comments are sticking now and some discussion on the topic has started, so please, share your opinions with Google as well by posting over there.