Interesting tidbit: the hash they have for the infringed work it's the correct hash for ubuntu-20.04.2.0-desktop-amd64.iso [0] - this removes any good faith argument on their part. There is an infinitely small chance of collisions - but I would like them to produce a DMCA notice with the actual name of the infringed upon protected media, not just the hash. I believe Canonical should step in, since this is someone cla…
I was interested and also searched the hash ( 4ba4fbf7231a3a660e86892707d25c135533a16a ). I didn't see the second link you posted? and I can't find the hash by CTRL+F on the page when clicking the link? Am I missing something?
That's the Ubuntu torrent - with the correct hash - but indexed by Google as a Rebirth torrent. At the bottom of the page [1] there is a link to the Lumen Database.
The first link has the hash in the URL. The Lumen Database one - even if I look at the full URLs - doesn't have the hash in the list. I am guessing that one of the pages had a link to the Ubuntu torrent.
This seems like a good reminder that Google decides what we see out of the interwebs!
[0] https://postimg.cc/30R85HHy [1] https://postimg.cc/Z9MjF8K1