Ubuntu Torrent Removed From Google Due To DMCA Complaint (omgubuntu.co.uk)
Reader LichtSpektren shares a report from OMG Ubuntu: Cited in a DMCA takedown request filed against Google on behalf of Paramount Pictures is an innocuous link to a 32-bit alternate install image Ubuntu 12.04.2 LTS. The takedown request seeks to remove links to a number of torrent URLS that are alleged to infringe on Paramount movie Transformers: Age of Extinction. Ubuntu clearly doesn't. All it takes is a quick glance at the URL in question to see that. It's very much a stock ISO of an old Ubuntu release. And yet Google has complied with the request and scrubbed the link to the page in question from its search index.
Is anybody surprised that, this time, Google did not exercise discretion and retain the link as they did with Warner Brother's request to take down their own web site?
Perhaps a $10,000 fine for each falsely submitted DMCA claim. Innocent until proven infringing. Shit like this just makes me buy less and pirate more, haven't bought a DVD in years.
That there were some penalties to people/corporations who DMCA stuff that they clearly don't own.
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
If it is automated, why is it that Google flags a DMCA complaint on WB vs WB earlier this month? Why does Google not automatically take it down?
Because Google does all of this to serve the Studios. They have a whitelist of stuff that they just ignore takedown requests for, to prevent DMCA abuse by ordinary people from hurting the sstudios. Abuse the other direction is just fine, of course.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
But to go back to what someone else said in another thread, when Warner Brothers is asked if they're sure, and they answer yes, it becomes admissible evidence of a higher level of culpability. Knowing no other facts, a bad takedown could conceivably be the result of conduct that doesn't even rise to the level of negligence--maybe someone got bad info somehow, maybe someone copied all the torrents linked from a page that contains a dozen Transformers torrents, and inexplicably, one for Ubuntu. I can see a jury of reasonable men accepting that with the sheer volume of piracy WB has to deal with, its agents can still make mistakes even when exercising reasonable care.
The counter notice changes that. It's like the difference between an author making a typo even after a round or two of self-editing, and an author getting an marked up draft from his editor with a big red circle around the typo in question, and still not fixing the typo. The counter notice is a big favor to WB, it's a warning to pay extra attention to a specific issue, and WB, by responding Yes, is either saying "We looked again, and this Ubuntu torrent actually contains a terrible movie," or they're saying, "GTFO google, we don't actually care to check our work." At this point, it would be hard for WB to argue that its agents weren't extremely reckless, if not acting intentionally.
Sending the counter-takedown may not get immediate results, but it will yield a treasure trove of useful evidence for anyone with the standing to sue or to trigger relevant enforcement actions under the DMCA or related laws.