Copyright Takedown Requests to Google Doubled In 2013

Daniel_Stuckey writes "Last month, a company working on behalf of the publisher Random House, asked Google to remove links to a free copy of Stephen King's Carrie from search results. Google complied for three out of the four requested links, but didn't remove Kim Dotcom's new website Mega.co.nz as requested — for even if Mega is hosting pirated copies of Carrie, they sure aren't on the homepage. But leaving that link up was an exception to the rule. More and more, copyright owners and the organizations they employ are cutting off where the websites and the public meet — the search engine. Google's transparency reports show that requests to remove links to copyrighted material rose steadily in 2013. The search giant received 6.5 million requests during the week of November 18, 2013, which is over twice as many as the same week a year ago. Google said it complies with 97 percent of requests." I know someone who had his original work taken down by a Warner Bros DMCA bot (without recourse, naturally, since only lawyers are people nowadays).

Comments

New Search Engine

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

We need a search engine that only searches DMCA takedown requests.

Google is halfway there, publishing every(?) takedown request they get.

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

Re:New Search Engine

[Charliemopps]

Actually, that's where I usually find the best torrents. I do the search, hit the take down request and thanks to Firefoxes "right-click open link" I can download them right off the DMCA request. It's awesome. If I have to look through the google links, most of them are scams or spam... the DMCA requests give me a nice consolidated list of content I'm actually interested in.

Watching the media industry try and fight file sharing is like watching someone you really dislike struggling in quicksand... with a snake wrapped around them... they keep spitting at you and throwing rocks, but that just makes it all the better as you watch them slowly sinking towards their ultimate doom. Actually, I'm prolly pull out someone I really hate... the media industry however can die.

Re:New Search Engine

[Anonymous Coward]

So you only download torrents that the copyright owners are aware of? That sounds like a fantastic way to be named in a John Doe suit.

Re:THE SOLUTION !

[HiThere]

That depends on how you do it (though the fake letterhead is improper).

If you hire someone to send in the requests, then they are allowed to trust that you are making the request in good faith. Their's no penalty to you for lying to them. So nobody violates the law, and you can accomplish the same goal. But you probably do want to use incorporated safety nets, so that the target of the takedown notice can't get anything by suing you. So you're likely to need a lot of throw-away corporations. Each one, of course, should have it's own letterhead. (Why fake someone else's letterhead, anyway. It's not as if it's difficult to mock up a letterhead with the Gimp, Simple Scan, and Inkscape. Takes a couple of hours for the first one, and 10 minutes for each change.

But, IIUC, the DMCA makes no requirement that the originator of the takedown request has a good-faith reason to believe that it is correct, merely that the person who files the request has a good-faith reason. And it is quite apparent that lawyers are always filing requests for someone else that have no validity or plausibility, and which they have reason to know have no validity. And NONE have ever been prosecuted. (Well, I've never heard of any being prosecuted.)

Still sucks

[zaywot]

I have friend who's a slightly computerhobic musician. They were so proud about learning how to synthesize on their computer, that they decided to try making a YouTube video. They spent hours peerfecting some classical piece (Handel, I think). They created a YouTube account, figured out how to put the mp3 to a static picture, and posted it privately, intending to figure out how to animate the music score. Before they had the chance, (and while the video was still private), they got a takedown notice. They were totally in a panic that this could impact their day job. I helped them put together a counter notice. When they got the demand to "prove" they owned the content, there was much more panic. Even though the-powers-that-be took the notice away, there was nobody they couldd call about the notice, nobody but me for them to yell at about how unfair it was.

Upshot: to this day, they've never gone back to finish that video, and publish it. And if you talk to them about synthesizing music, instead of happy pride, you hear panicy shuddering and unhappiness.

I think there's a serious imbalance of power when legitimate owners have to prove their innocence, and the spawners of that notice get off with no consequences. How do we fix this?

I have been on the receiving end

[tanveer1979]

I made a time lapse video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVbBfUWq3mU

I used background music from ccmixer
Gave the full attribution too!

Music : Improvisation On Sunday, by Alex Beroza(http://ccmixter.org/files/AlexBeroza/...)
Uses : http://ccmixter.org/files/The3amAssoc... again under the following license.

And got a notice that it matches. I filed a dispute, and haven't heard from them again, and my video is up and running. However, if they had filed a counter claim, they would have taken it down? My account gets a copyright strike? I dunno

anyways, I notified the actual music composer about the claim, and maybe he is also trying to get it removed from their DB.

But its scary, if somebody puts a takedown notice, I cannot seek recourse. I am not in the USA and that makes it even more difficult.