Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Film Studios Send Takedown Notices About Takedown Notices

Posted by Soulskill on from the can-you-issue-a-takedown-for-the-streisand-effect? dept.

another random user sends this excerpt from the BBC: "Two film studios have asked Google to take down links to messages sent by them requesting the removal of links connected to film piracy. Google receives 20 million 'takedown' requests, officially known as DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) notices, every month. They are all published online. Recent submissions by Fox and Universal Studios include requests for the removal of previous takedown notices. ... By making the notices available, Google is unintentionally highlighting the location of allegedly pirated material, say some experts. 'It would only take one skilled coder to index the URLs from the DMCA notices in order to create one of the largest pirate search engines available,' wrote Torrent Freak editor Ernesto Van Der Sar on the site."

35 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. Barbara Streisand effect... by dmgxmichael · · Score: 3, Funny

    Again. A pity the first amendment doesn't apply to corporations.

    1. Re:Barbara Streisand effect... by Luckyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And the biggest pity of all is that you think you will be actually allowed to get that kind of presidential candidate in the first place.

    2. Re:Barbara Streisand effect... by pclminion · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A bigger pity that Google will get down on their knees and deepthroat the MPAA like a good little whore.

      Your perspective is skewed. Google isn't doing this because the *AA asks them to, they are doing it because it is the law.

      If the *AA's get out of hand, Google could easily just buy the entire industry. Every single one of those companies. With cash. Several times over. You don't seem to understand the amount of money Google has. They aren't kowtowing to private corporate interests at this point, they are simply doing what the law requires them to do. If you get a take-down notice, you have to take it down. If the *AA's begin to make the world suck too bad for Google, they could just purchase them and eradicate all of it.

    3. Re:Barbara Streisand effect... by Lazere · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who said anything about president? And there is the real problem, the people are only looking at the president, but when it comes to the people in the house/senate, they just vote for the guy who has the right letter behind them. Remember kids, the president doesn't make the laws. Please actually pay attention to your house/senate candidates next election.

    4. Re:Barbara Streisand effect... by Penguinisto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A bigger pity still is that we get down on our knees and deepthroat the ??AA when we reelect their politicians over and over.

      ...or buy tickets to their movies, or buy the Blu-Ray, DVD, etc...

      But yeah, you're mostly right. I do disagree about it being a case of starstruck behavior, though. I think it's because the vast majority of the population simply doesn't give a crap. They're either completely ignorant about it, know something about it but think it's "too geeky" and happily not care, or they know all about it but happily download movies anyway (thinking that the odds of getting caught are well below that of getting busted for illegal marijuana use in Northern California).

      Either way, until you can get the population both cognizant and passionate about it, approximately nothing will happen. Problem is, most folks get their info from, oh, wait - the media. The same media who really, really, really don't want you to get in the way of the revenue streams from their respective entertainment divisions.

      Long story short? Good luck with that, sadly.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    5. Re:Barbara Streisand effect... by turp182 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Anti-trust regulations would probably prevent such a move, otherwise Apple would have done it already...

      Interesting idea.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    6. Re:Barbara Streisand effect... by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Please actually pay attention to your house/senate candidates next election.

      Goodluckwiddat. I think one of the problems is this message that getting out to vote is such a noble thing to do. It isn't. If you aren't educated about a decision you participate in, then why are you participating to begin with?

      IMO end the "get out the vote" "rock the vote" "vote or die" campaigns.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
  2. Sorry, the law doesn't work that way by afidel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sorry but even the government is getting their hand slapped over secret proceedings (see the recent rulings regarding national security letters), there's no way we're going to allow companies to hide their actions in a civil matter.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    1. Re:Sorry, the law doesn't work that way by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      we? "what's this we shit, white man?"

      'we' have stopped having control over our laws decades ago.

      'they' have control and everyone knows it. you been asleep or something?

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:Sorry, the law doesn't work that way by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 4, Interesting

      'they' have control and everyone knows it. you been asleep or something?

      It is, as one commentator has recently put it, the bitter legacy of Mickey Mouse.

  3. Not raaaaaiiiiiiiiiaaaaain on your wedding day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    By making the notices available, Google is unintentionally highlighting the location of allegedly pirated material, say some experts.

    See, Alanis, *this* is ironic.

  4. Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Was that a comment or a request for a development project?

  5. Yo, I heard you like the DMCA... by Arancaytar · · Score: 5, Funny

    (...)

  6. it is as we have feared. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Funny

    Takedown notices have become so widely applied to every aspect of internet content that they have evolved to become self aware.

    the DMCA is becoming t2@(35## NO CARRIER

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:it is as we have feared. by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 3, Funny

      Now we just need to convince them to take themselves down. Is it wrong to coerce suicide in an artificial lifeform?

    2. Re:it is as we have feared. by JeanCroix · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wrong? Pfft. Not only is it right, but it can be an artform. Let's get the master to do it - bring in Shatner.

  7. Confidentiality not lawful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When you send a demand letter it is property of the recipient. They are free to publish it if they wish. A person receiving a DCMA take doewn notice is under no obligation, and in fact would be stupid to, agree to any confidentiality at all. The recipient is under no obligation to do so.

    A more pressing area of legal disclosure is charges against otherwise innocent until proven guilty persons. Prosecutors do perp walks, and public news conferences, all the time despite the legal, and ethical, and moral, land mines.

    JJ

  8. An Easy Problem to Fix by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Stop sending takedown notices. You're helping the so-called pirates and by the logic you've used in the past that makes you culpable for their piracy.

  9. We are going to start an endless loop.... by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now they will send to Slashdot a takedown notice to take down the message about the takedown request they sent to google to take down the list of their takedown requests....

  10. Re:Not raaaaaiiiiiiiiiaaaaain on your wedding day. by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 5, Funny

    "It's like a million Dancing With The Stars, when all you want is Doctor Who..."

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  11. Indexing the URLs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why would you need a skilled coder when the databases are in plain CSV format ?

    http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/data/

    1. Re:Indexing the URLs by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Because to most of these sites and executives a CSV file is a magical thing that requires highly talented programmers.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  12. Re:Unless by fredklein · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hell, in some places, the laws themselves are copyrighted.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/31/ignorance-of-dcs-copyrighted-laws-can-be-costly/

  13. stupid robots by Sloppy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Some day I'm going to write a page about a "boardwalk game where you manage an empire from your throne" just to see how fast it gets blocked from google search results. Oops, I probably blocked Slashdot just by typing that. The robots who send the notices are amazingly stupid and use leaps of logic that make your average creationist look like an evidence-user.

    I'm not saying piracy isn't happening out there, but from what I've seen I bet over 90% of DMCA notices are bogus. If anyone is crawling chilling-effects looking for juicy links to yummy forbidden files, boy are they going to be disappointed. They'll learn that someone's CS101 web crawling assignment has been emailing google about every damn page it finds.

    Anyway, since in this case, the content's provenance is systematically known, they can confidently ignore the DMCA notices, as though they virtually received a counter-notice from within their own organization. No need to take anything down. Non-story, other than highlighting how amazingly bad the robots are, and that the special legal obligation created by them, probably ought to be removed or else notice-senders should be held accountable. Congress, do something about that. Can't someone just anonymously slip it into the budget bill?

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    1. Re:stupid robots by roman_mir · · Score: 3, Interesting

      BTW, I looked at the notices, they include a large number of links that start with vk.com, which is a Russian version of FB, the way FB should have been designed.

      It has a much better, more intuitive user interface from stories I read on comparing FB vs VK (vk means "v kontakte", which may be translated as "in touch" for "staying in touch") and on that site anybody can host any image, song, video and text they like and it's very easy to search through them and find whatever you want.

      It is actually a good advert for VK and they offer a large number of languages that you can access the site in.

      --
      You can't handle the truth.
  14. Critically important by OhHellWithIt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    By making the notices available, Google is unintentionally highlighting the location of allegedly pirated material, say some experts. 'It would only take one skilled coder to index the URLs from the DMCA notices in order to create one of the largest pirate search engines available,' wrote Torrent Freak editor Ernesto Van Der Sar on the site."

    I stumbled on one of these notices filed by the RIAA yesterday, and it seems not only reasonable but important for the notice to be posted, including the relevant URL; otherwise, how will I know that the site hosting the illegal material is doing so illegally? I looked at the site in question, and they most certainly didn't include any notice that downloading that particular song was a violation of copyright. But because of the notice that Google linked to, I knew that I shouldn't do it.

    It seems to me that MPAA and RIAA want to have their cake and eat it, too.

    --
    "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
  15. This was done by accident? by Stormin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    By making the notices available, Google is unintentionally highlighting the location of allegedly pirated material, say some experts.

    I thought that was kind of the whole point of the things being posted?

  16. Actually, meta-Streisand by srussia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    First there was the Streisand (unintentionally calling attention to what you don't want publicized),

    then the reverse Streisand (intentionally calling attention by demanding suppression of ostensibly unwanted but actually desired publicity),

    and now comes the meta-Streisand (unintentionally calling attention to intentional demands that caused unintentional publicity of what you didn't want publicized.)

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
    1. Re:Actually, meta-Streisand by nugatory78 · · Score: 3, Funny

      if you can pull off all three at the same time, that grants you the power up of mega-Streisand

      --
      The beginning of knowledge is the discovery of something we do not understand. - Frank Herbert
  17. Actually, mecha-Streisand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    And what actually is "mega-Streisand"?
    Don't you mean mecha-Streisand?

  18. More Likely by StillNeedMoreCoffee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Movie industry does not want it known how active they are at sending take down notices. After all the price we all pay for movies goes up as there effort to do this sort of activity goes up. The 'take down tax'.

    There is also the big brother bad guy protecting their profit against the little guy public relations problem. They certainly would like all that take down to happen behind the scenes where no one notices.

    They are trying to do some damage control.

  19. 'MPAATakedwn=': recursive on all control paths... by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm just curious if they'll send takedown notices on the takedown notices on the... well, you know. After all, Google may have to append the original notice on the 2nd one so everyone knows what's being referred to...

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  20. Re:DUH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I love the smell of recursion in the morning.

  21. Re:DUH! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Round and round we go..."

    There's something here I don't understand.

    If the material has been taken down, then the links should not function.

    If the links have not been taken down, then the material is (most likely) not infringing.

    So the "problem" would appear to be nothing but a fiction.

  22. Re:DUH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    In this case I think the takedown notices are not for the removal of the pirate websites, but the removal of their URLs from Google's results. If the URLs remain in Google's takedown notice database, and the sites themselves are still up, people can just comb Google's database for pirate links.

    That isn't to say that the larger 'problem' of piracy itself is anything but fiction, of course.

    Captcha: LAWSUIT