DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google • Hacker News Board

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#101

Post by lambda » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 6:15 AM UTC

dbaupp wrote: post #4

This removes a variety of projects from Google search results, including ones from Mozilla (specifically, Rust), Facebook, Yahoo, Netflix, openSUSE, as well as github documentation, e.g. - https://github.com/yahoo/pure - https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo - https://github.com/openSUSE/wicked - https://github.com/Netflix/Lipstick - https://github.com/facebook/rebound - https://help.github.com/articles/dealing-with-non…

Has anyone (Mozilla, Yahoo, SUSE, Netflix, Facebook, Github) filed a counter-notice yet? That's the next step in the DMCA dance; if you file a counter notice, and the accuser does not then file a lawsuit, Google can put back the content.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#102

Post by nl » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 6:16 AM UTC

Animats wrote: post #98

nl wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, and perhaps I'm missing something. Why is it necessary to post the lawyer's address and point out that it appears to be their home too?

If they had a legitimate business office address filed with the California Secretary of State, it wouldn't take so much digging to find the responsible party.

Are you arguing that it was difficult to find the responsible party, and that posting their address somehow helped that?

What possible outcome are you hoping to achieve by doing this?

Isn't this little more than a low level case of "dox"-ing someone you disagree with?

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#103

Post by beedogs » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 6:20 AM UTC

Why on earth do search engines even respond to DMCA complaints? This is madness.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#104

Post by wmf » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 6:20 AM UTC

MichaelGG wrote: post #99

otterley wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "under penalty of perjury" phrase modifies the second clause, not the first. In other words, it's not perjury if the information in the notice is inaccurate -- it's perjury if you falsely claim you are authorized to act on behalf of the grieving party.

So I'm thinking if I want to boost my rankings, all I have to do is file a DMCA notice on my competitor's sites? Certainly someone has to be doing this, somewhere. At worst, sneak your target URLs into a long list of torrents. How much is bumping off a few competing search results worth?

And then they file a counter-notification and the links are back.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#105

Post by chris_wot » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 6:21 AM UTC

bvanslyke wrote: post #76

Wow, I'm not familiar with this film studio, but this is a terrible move on their part. I don't go to the movies much anyway, but I'm gonna try to avoid paying for any of their films, and I urge everyone who cares about an open internet to do the same.

These movies don't get released to the cinemas. Well, not NORMAL cinemas :)

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#106

Post by otterley » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 6:46 AM UTC

MichaelGG wrote: post #99

otterley wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "under penalty of perjury" phrase modifies the second clause, not the first. In other words, it's not perjury if the information in the notice is inaccurate -- it's perjury if you falsely claim you are authorized to act on behalf of the grieving party.

So I'm thinking if I want to boost my rankings, all I have to do is file a DMCA notice on my competitor's sites? Certainly someone has to be doing this, somewhere. At worst, sneak your target URLs into a long list of torrents. How much is bumping off a few competing search results worth?

If you intentionally file a false claim, you can be liable for damages under the Act. But that's not the same as perjury. See 17 U.S.C. 512(f).

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#107

Post by btown » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 6:48 AM UTC

dbaupp wrote: post #4

This removes a variety of projects from Google search results, including ones from Mozilla (specifically, Rust), Facebook, Yahoo, Netflix, openSUSE, as well as github documentation, e.g. - https://github.com/yahoo/pure - https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo - https://github.com/openSUSE/wicked - https://github.com/Netflix/Lipstick - https://github.com/facebook/rebound - https://help.github.com/articles/dealing-with-non…

Confirmed: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&e...

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#108

Post by verroq » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 7:06 AM UTC

nl wrote: post #102

Animats wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they had a legitimate business office address filed with the California Secretary of State, it wouldn't take so much digging to find the responsible party.

Are you arguing that it was difficult to find the responsible party, and that posting their address somehow helped that? What possible outcome are you hoping to achieve by doing this? Isn't this little more than a low level case of "dox"-ing someone you disagree with?

I like how these poor corporate entities are now the victims.

>Isn't this little more than a low level case of "dox"-ing someone you disagree with?

You might as well have said

>Isn't this little more than a low level case of "dox"-ing someone that hurt your feelings

But I digress. Given that various socially unacceptable activity on the internet are frequently punished by doxxing (http://racistsgettingfired.tumblr.com/), I fail to see how this is any different.

The privacy of this "company" isn't violated the same way I publish your home address. People knowing them and refusing their business isn't censorship of their free speech or their rights or whatever they were up to before. However it may induce them to be more self conscious next time they commit perjury.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#109

Post by MichaelGG » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 7:29 AM UTC

wmf wrote: post #104

MichaelGG wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I'm thinking if I want to boost my rankings, all I have to do is file a DMCA notice on my competitor's sites? Certainly someone has to be doing this, somewhere. At worst, sneak your target URLs into a long list of torrents. How much is bumping off a few competing search results worth?

And then they file a counter-notification and the links are back.

Yeah, which means people have to check searches for their result, then the DMCA notice, then file counterclaim and wait for Google to reinstate it. Seems like a pretty nifty blackhat tactic, especially if timed right.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#110

Post by MichaelGG » Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 7:31 AM UTC

otterley wrote: post #106

MichaelGG wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I'm thinking if I want to boost my rankings, all I have to do is file a DMCA notice on my competitor's sites? Certainly someone has to be doing this, somewhere. At worst, sneak your target URLs into a long list of torrents. How much is bumping off a few competing search results worth?

If you intentionally file a false claim, you can be liable for damages under the Act. But that's not the same as perjury. See 17 U.S.C. 512(f).

I wonder how much due diligence Google puts into verifying DMCA notices beforehand. And if you wanted to do it "legit" you could create some works with search terms you wanna censor. So like, "Hotel Reservations in X", a photograph of a Ramada Inn. Then get these takedown firms to go spam notices like Wicked did here, and collateral damage ends up removing some of your competitors.

Just seems rather abusable.