Automated DMCA Takedown Notices Request Censorship of Legitimate Sites

Techmeology writes "Microsoft has sent automated DMCA notices to Google demanding the removal of several legitimate URLs from its search results that Microsoft claims were facilitating the distribution of illegal copies of Windows 8, including links to BBC news articles, Wikipedia pages, U.S. government websites, and even Bing! The erroneous DMCA notices are being sent automatically by rights holders, who are increasingly using such techniques."

Comments

Takedown the election

[jonsmirl]

Someone please send DMCA takedown notices to all sites currently covering the US presidential election. That might get the problem fixed.

Re:Takedown the election

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahaha, yeah nothing would fix the election like an uniformed population. Removing news coverage would just let the candidates escape the dumb things they say.

And that would differ..... how?

Knock out the spammers

[MrDoh!]

Sounds like Google would be well within their rights now to label Microsoft a spam network and ignore ALL future takedown requests.

Re:Knock out the spammers

[Anonymous Coward]

How can you say that? Do you know for sure that the Caesar's Civil War entry on Wikipedia isn't infringing on the Windows 8 Beta IP? I mean, 5 years after Caesar crossed the Rubicon he was named dictator. And 5 years after Windows 95 was released Microsoft was named a monopoly. Is this a coincidence? Consider this: Steve Ballmer was born on March 24, 1956. 2000 years and 1 week prior, Caesar had defeated his last enemy on March 17, 45 BC. Coincidence?

The only logical conclusion that any sane person can come up with is that Gaius Julius Caesar is the property of both Ballmer and Microsoft and any reference to him or the number 45 (for 45 BC) is a copyright violation. Case closed.

Re:Knock out the spammers

[dcollins117]

I don't think that's ever been done, and to make things worse how do you get a bot to face penalties of perjury? Pinning responsability for the bot on someone would be difficult and would most likely get put on the most junior coder or somebody that's left MS.

Well if that's the case, what legal standing does a bot have to make a DCMA claim? I would argue - none.

Perjury charges forthcoming?

[Anonymous Coward]

An automated notice should fall afoul of the portion of the notice which must be sworn under penalty of perjury. You know, the part that says you are the person who owns the copyright to the work you're claiming (not under penalty of perjury) is being hosted illegally at the listed URL(s).

Captcha: victim

Bad law is bad

[ATMAvatar]

With zero penalty for bad takedown notices, even those sent in bad faith, I'm amazed this hasn't happened sooner and on a much larger scale.

Well, that will teach Microsoft

[ohnocitizen]

With all the embarrassment from a snafu like this, Microsoft is sure to reform their ways. Starting with a complete rewrite of the DMCA-auto tool in something other than VB.net.

A DMCA takedown notice is theft.

[cwills]

A DMCA takedown notice for something that doesn't belong to you is simply theft, and should be treated as such. If the whole purpose of DMCA is to protect the owner of some property, it needs to work both ways.

If I called a towing company claimed that the car you had parked in your driveway was mine and that I wanted it towed to my house, that would be theft.

Nothing to lose

[whoever57]

Microsoft has nothing to lose from this. Removing legitimate sites from Google's index only helps Bing.

Re:at the sentence

[green1]

The point is that you should not be automating something that claims to be 100% accurate under penalty of perjury at identifying content on the internet when we know that it's simply not possible to write such a thing.