Slashdot Mirror
Google and Microsoft To Crackdown On Piracy Sites In Search Results (telegraph.co.uk)
Google and Microsoft pledged on Monday to crack down on sites hosting pirated content that show up on their search engines. In what is being called a first of its kind agreement, Google and Microsoft's Bing will demote U.K. search results of copyright infringing websites. From a report on The Telegraph: The search engine operators have signed up to a clampdown that will see the UK's copyright watchdog monitor the search results they provide for unlawful websites. The agreement follows years of campaigning by record labels and film studios, which have accused Google and Microsoft of turning a blind eye to piracy and dragging their feet over measures to protect copyright online. Under a new voluntary code, the tech giants have committed to demote websites that have repeatedly been served with copyright infringement notices, so that they do not appear on the first page for common searches.
This should pump up traffic to DuckDuckGo.
This is fantastic news! Does anyone know where I can find the current Google/Microsoft price sheet for result filtering?
I don't like it when people talk about religion or green cars (hate, hate HATE the colour green). How much would it cost to have Google protect people from search results relating to religion or green cars?
blah, blah, blah.
Maybe some people should learn a thing or two from the music industry and offer a fully working better alternative
Netflix makes it so easy to watch television but still these people break it.
Behind my geo-wall I only get about 36% of the USA catalog (~1100 vs ~400) but my 'rent' is similar.
Maybe I will in the future directly go to the second and not even check the first page at all...
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
If they're removing them "now", what the hell were they doing before? Results are already riddled with DMCA takedown removed results. Google has been publishing the list of these removed URLs for years:
https://www.google.com/transpa...
Also, FUN FACT. They're not doing what they say because they never do what they say. If they REALLY went after copyright infringing websites they'd take down:
- Google+
- Facebook
- YouTube
- Reddit
- Twitter
- Imgur
Those places are FULL of copyrighted information and nobody bats an eye.
So the UK will get its own censored version of Google and Bing, like China. I'm sure they're proud of their new found greatness. Look at us, we can make Google do as we say. Yeah, you told them to shot you in the foot and they obliged. Idiots.
Nobody should have to suffer the terrible fate of using Microsoft products, not even software pirates or even literal pirates! #OnlyReadTheTitle ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Does it really cover all copyright infringement sites?
Microsoft shouldn't worry. You wouldn't have been able to find those results with Bing anyway, much less anything you were actually searching for.
>> demote websites that have repeatedly been served with copyright infringement notices
So...you're saying that we'll stop seeing YouTube results in Google searches?
LOL...do they really honestly believe people are using their searches for piracy?? There's dedicated websites that people just know where to get what.
It takes 5 years of hammering noobs with "google it", "google it", one stupid question after another expecting an answer rather than finding it their damn selves, the same applies @ piracy. Noobs sit and cry asking others how/where to download stuff but don't have half the brain as to just search themselves.
This is nothing but a waste of time, load of bollocks
so teenage mutant ninja turtles filetype:torrent will no longer work ??
oh well toorgle still works i hope
I use ixquick because it doesn't track you but it still has the same problem as all the other alternative search engines.
In the end they just go back to Google for the query. Remember the days when internet search engines were a dime a dozen and they all had different algorithms.
That was nice.
Since TM made it legal to snoop on my day and night I have been using an encrypted proxy.
I usually proxy within the UK for speed ad BBC iPlayer. But I have proxied elsewhere - speeds wernt that bad.
I'll just do that again if they take down Proxy Bunker UK.
Im thinking that the record labels and film studios should be financing these anti-piracy measures with some of their profits, not the everyman.
Grammar Nazi here. When used in this context, "crackdown" is actually separated into two words, that is, "crack down".
If they're launching an initiative or describing a method or process , then it would be "Blah blah blah will institute a crackdown on piracy..."
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
If they REALLY went after copyright infringing websites they'd take down [the major social media sites]
Websites that have a takedown policy and enforce it are not "copyright infringing websites" per the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act of 1998, codified as 17 USC 512.
Bing can't find Mocrosoft's own web pages, how the heck has it ever found piracy sites?
That should put an end to copyright infringement once and for all!
Well done to all involved!!
"If it is not on Bing or Google, then we have effectively eliminated piracy. Great job everyone."
Bonuses will be rewarded, a few more jobs at MS/Google to monitor piracy claims. Lawyers will creep away and chase something else.
But most of all - piracy will be dead!
OK, maybe not.
It could curtail the casual infringer. It will not deter true pirates, or those who may operate in the gray areas.
What is a gray area? I think there are many.
I once pre-ordered a CD from a band I really liked who had a new album coming out, two months ahead of the release. Release day came, and went. It was in stores, but I didn't have mine yet. After a week, I downloaded it. Another week passed, and my CD showed up.
I have purchased a DVD for my kids (many, actually) where I could not rip it to put on my media server. I was able to download it in less time that it would have taken to rip it.
I have a Roku, and I also have Charter cable. For a lot of the Roku channels I just have to log in with my Charter account to get access. Pretty painless process. However, for some of the channels (like Comedy Central) this doesn't work because they list multiple Charter providers, none of which are mine. So I am out of luck for those channels. It's not that big of a deal to me, so I don't download those shows. But I could see how that could piss some people off and why they might seek out to download them.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
who the hell uses a search engine for piracy is an idiot
HEY FBI CIA im looking to break the law ..weeee i'm full on retard....
WHAT this really is ....THEY are going to remove the results publically that they were collecting on YOU FULL RETARDS
and farts are not agaisnt trump so everytime you fart you are supporting trump....
nothing like dumbass logic eh?
In the UK we're not too worried about the FBI and CIA, but the recent Investigatory Powers Bill does mean all our communications are under surveillance by GCHQ and the Police.
But if they're also censoring search results, well that's just jangles. We'll switch our VPNs to search google from a different country.
and the cheers were wild!!!
I personally get my piracy information from CNN, BBC, Torrentfreak, and all the other media outlets who provide an itemised list of what the MAFIAA are targeting.
Go right ahead, Google, Miscreant-o-soft, MPAA, RIAA, and whoever else; continue to play your endless game of Whack-a-Mole if it amuses you to do so. In the end, you can't stop the signal.
Don't consume Hollywood's excrement regardless of whether you pay for it or not. Find ways to pay for any independent artists whose entertainment you wish to consume. Even if you still use "pirate" sites to actually obtain some content from the independents, you can still find ways to support them monetarily and sleep well at night.
But supporting Hollywood and it's trail of destruction is not advisable even if you're getting the content completely free of charge. This change to Google/Bing should affect exactly zero people who have a few brain cells to rub together.
If Hollywood was smart, they'd support anyone consuming their cultural cyanide at any cost to them.
they are CIA assets use to own you, you stupid fucking human beings
No we're not worried, we know GCHQ would sell our grandmonthers to be on the right side of the FBI/CIA and will give open access to any information they have and extradite us before we can blink. The investigatory power bill will mean we won't be able to prove it any more.
Perhaps pirates want to purchase hooks and peg legs on e-bay?
If you meant to say "copyright infringement", please use the correct term. Otherwise you become a sounding board for the MPAA/RIAA by framing the issue in their language.
I had the money. I was willing to pay. I STILL have the money. And I would still be willing to pay. But it's too late.
The MS store is broken, but it's even more broken (seemingly) if you are living outside of the US (as a U.S. citizen). I can log in to my MS account on both my computer(s) and my XBox(s). Cool. I want to simply buy a game. The wife won't let me buy an XBoxOne because we have every other system plus a gaming computer. Awesome. Fine. I'll just get the game on the computer, but the only way to get it is through the MS Store and they won't let me have it because of where I happen to be right now.
So what was I supposed to do? This was a few months ago, but still, what other alternative did I have?
Wake up! Most honest people don't "pirate" for the fuck of it. People, WILLING people that are willing to pay money will pay money. But companies like MS and Google and ..... blah blah blah create too many extenuating circumstances for the willing.
Then, the Willing become Pirates....
Since that's pretty much what the labels want, mission accomplished.
Media companies are colluding with the biggest search internet search engines to manipulate the data they return... the things they don't like go down (things that do not cost you and I money) and things they do like go up (things that used to cost you no money).
Consider the vast troves of data these profit driven companies have amassed against us, and it becomes quite clear what is happening. They already know what you are going to be looking for on the net based on your past searches, cataloged interests, and other data sources (like your cell phone and bank account logs) With this new *procedure* you will be presented with results of your queries that best represent the interests of those who stand to take your money, or worse, monetize you as a product, and NOT data that best represents your searches.
To put it another way,
Today, research is synonymous with google. According to this, other entities are now going to manipulate your research findings based on their profit motive. Imagine the man in a suit manipulating the books you access at a public library, in an effort to get you to buy a few exclusive chapters. These chapters are freely available one shelf over, but the friendly curator makes sure you never see it.
This is manipulation, it's censorship, and I bet, in a few years time, it will be accepted and embraced. scary times we live in.
Publicly accessible information has now become publicly acceptable information.
You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
left up to the judicial branch.
But congress isn't going to decide on whether any web site is in violation or not.
True; Congress lets the courts sort that out.
As for whether a site is tied closely enough to infringement to deserve demotion, the featured article doesn't give the complete algorithm, but it does take into account notices of claimed infringement: "the tech giants have committed to demote websites that have repeatedly been served with copyright infringement notices." I assume these are the same notices of claimed infringement that Google forwards to Lumen Database, particularly those pursuant to 17 USC 512.
The end is near. With Zuckerberg's over-reaching dream of a Facebook-dominated worldwide community ruled by him (and the other digital media giants, of course), and search engines manipulating results to exclude "illegal" content (now it's piracy and "terrorism", tomorrow politically incorrect and heterodoxical views and opinions), the dream of the internet as a tool for freedom is truly dead forever. All hail the Digital Reich.
See my subject: IF you must ask what that is, look it up or in summation even if powers hated one another if the system they represented which kept both in power was threatened they would for an alliance, even IF temporary only looking aside @ their long term differences, to CRUSH the usually "lone wolf" threatening their power structure BOTH adhered to & gained power from.
APK
P.S.=> Google & MS agreeing on something HAS to be "noblesse oblige" in other words... apk
The ONLY media companies telling you the truth today are Brietbart and InfoWars. Believe anything else at your own risk.
Google is so Alta Vista now.
Lumen Database is now the king of piracy search engines.
Just enter the movie/song title into the search box and see all the DMCA complaints, which list all the URLs for that movie.
Let the MPAA and RIAA do all the hard indexing work for you. Thanks guys!
example: here are 300 ways to get The Force Awakens. Good job team.
Engines. No sweat off my ass. Altavista google all the same to me. Results is what matters no matter what I search for.
I know programmers and UI designers need help with this type of English because they often get it wrong, even in Microsoft Windows which you'd think would be well-vetted due to its scale (it's not).
Log in = verb. Login = noun.
Shut down = verb. Shutdown = noun.
Pick up = verb. Pickup = noun.
Back up = verb. Backup = noun.
Crack down = verb. Crackdown = noun.
Everybody chanted when they refused to do this in China. Apparently "anti-piracy" is the good censorship, let's forget that UK's "anti-piracy" and "anti-porn" filters block a lot more.
Laws don't work like that, mostly. Laws don't grant you rights, they limit them. More so in areas with no defined constitution...
These guys are about to get extremely popular.
https://millionshort.com/
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
The only result this will provide is a new generation of search engines that don't have this kind of filters.
But they would be more covert and hide their presence and traffic. Most likely in a peer to peer fashion.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
yeah.. everybody normal uses a search engine to look for torrents, and it's usually whatever they use for everything else. and no, we're not worried about the fbi or the cia. and yes - we do agree you are a full on retard.
I have purchased a DVD for my kids (many, actually) where I could not rip it to put on my media server. I was able to download it in less time that it would have taken to rip it.
One of the many, many ways that current copyright law is screwed up is that the companies often offer an inferior product, namely in the form of ads you are compelled to watch every time you put the DVD into the machine, and the companies want removing or bypassing that to be illegal. Never mind that you do have ethical rights to it, and probably legal rights as well.
A compound word (i.e. CRACKDOWN) is NOT a verb. Use "crack down" instead. TWO WORDS, you fool.
WHEN ARE YOU GODDAMNED ILLITERATES GOING TO LEARN THE GODDAMNED LANGUAGE?
I'm in the US, not in the UK, but I have to ask: Don't these copyright holder mafioso understand that they've already lost the war? I've never in my life downloaded anything directly from a pirate website. However, as far back as 2002, I learned about LimeWire and then FrostWire from hearing it talked about in the mainstream media. I also learned about the now dead allofmp3 Russia-based pay downloading site from hearing about it in the media.
The copyright Mafia lost my loyalty for life when the MPAA and the RIAA launched their assault on elderly grandmothers and 12-year-old little girls who lived in housing projects. I also lost any respect I might have had left for the copyright holder mafia after they publicly executed allofMP3.com. I couldn't believe it when President Bush specifically mentioned allofMP3's existence being a hindrance to Russia joining either NATO or the WTO. All I could think was "Are you fucking serious?"
Now that I'm a tax-paying grown-up, I have a monthly Apple Music subscription that meets every need I have as far as listening to music. But if I did ever want to download anything from a pirate website, I would just use FrostWire. I never really understood or even trusted those random pirate websites that pop up on a basic Google search.
If I made my livelihood on selling sheet music for my own songs, a handful of incorrect takedown notices that bumped me off Google would be devastating to my business
Likewise for a handful of incorrect notices of claimed infringement sent to your ISP. You can sue the bastards for defamation of title unless the claim is that your own song is substantially similar to one of their own.
The big problem I see with this is:
Under a new voluntary code, the tech giants have committed to demote websites that have repeatedly been served with copyright infringement notices, so that they do not appear on the first page for common searches. Search engine autocomplete functions, a time-saving feature that suggests what users may be looking for, should also remove terms that may lead to pirate websites rather than legitimate services that pay fees to copyright holders.
As you can see, websites are not going to be demoted for offering pirate content, but will be demoted merely for being accused of offering pirate content. All accusations coming from known greedy media cartels that have already shown many times that they will do ANYTHING (legal or otherwise) for money. I've read enough articles that show a majority of all take down notices are bogus to know that an unsubstantiated accusation is not proof of guilt.
All this will do is give the media cartels the power to rank websites the way they see fit in order to maximize their profits.