Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

chillingeffects.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 168 posts

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#121

Post by dspillett »

SwellJoe wrote: post #83
dsl wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, you can take that tiny little shell holding company for all its worth...

If enough of those tiny little shell companies get wrung out to bankruptcy, there won't be any left to act as fronts for this kind of unethical, and illegal, behavior. And, if they are acting on behalf of other companies, that would likely come out in the court proceedings...which could allow taking the suit up the chain to the actual parties who instigated it. One would hope, anyway, though IP law in the US behaves…

> If enough of those tiny little shell companies get...

They are so easy to setup that you'll never win that race. It'll cost you in time and other resource every time, and you'll get nothing back, and while you are faffing around with one ten more companies are ready to go.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#122

Post by leni536 »

kbart wrote: post #114

Is there any tool to put back URLs from chillingeffects.org back to Google search results? Should not be that hard to make one (i.e. Firefox plugin).

The problem is that you lose ranking information. These are just a bunch of URLs unsorted (or maybe lexicographically sorted) in a file. It would be quite hard to seamlessly include the URLs.

AFAIK ddg does not take down search results based on DMCA notices but I'm not sure about that.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#123

Post by Beltiras »

ExpiredLink wrote: post #120
bossmojoman wrote: post #24

I hear that https://help.github.com/articles/dealing-with-non-fast-forwa... is pretty hot.

hard core - it contains push, pull, fetch and even merge. NSFW!

Most sexy of all: rebase. You can go back and do things differently the second time around.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#126

Post by TeMPOraL »

sarciszewski wrote: post #90
otterley wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The standard is one of actual knowledge -- so it's really difficult to enforce when a computer program is most likely generating the lists, and probably not being reviewed in detail.

Shouldn't automated takedowns be considered null and void? If so, is there a way to allow firms that are known to send bogus automated takedowns be blacklisted? (i.e. you can always ignore them, if they try to push anything, you just point to their history of automated processes) Something. Anything. To discourage this behavior. To hit them where it hurts. (The wallet.)

They should. But MAFIAA loves automated takedowns, and they don't care if they're valid either. So it's likely not going to happen.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#127

Post by dspillett »

dangrossman wrote: post #51
usbreply wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google cannot afford the legal liability of taking decisions on whether a DMCA notice is valid or invalid. They will take down everything specified in every DMCA notice even if it is obviously bogus, because not doing so opens them up to a lawsuit. (a lawsuit alleging malafide intentions or a lawsuit for harm if they should make a mistake in deciding which part of the DMCA notice to honor and which to ignore.) It is…

You only have to send a counternotice and the content is restored after 10 business days. With most companies, you can just send a properly worded e-mail. Others, like Google, have a web form you fill in. The DMCA never forces content in dispute to remain offline indefinitely even if you have zero resources; the complaining party has to go to court to make that happen.

10 business days could be a long time if your company is in the middle of a launch or other time sensitive period, and that is 10 days after you notice: I assume they won't contact you (how would thy know who to contact and how with any reliability?) to say "we've de-listed these sites, you might want to look into if you need to respond". This could be used to damage competitors, or in this case to accidentally damage random unrelated people/companies.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#128

Post by MichaelGG »

gee_totes wrote: post #19
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…

I wonder how these pages got picked up. If Wickedpictures is doing some type of Natural Language processing to identify these pages as their content, it would be interesting to analyze the content of these pages and reverse-engineer Wickedpictrue's system. Then of course, you could package that reverse-engineering work as a service that will insert red-herring comments in source code to set off the automated DMCA tak…

Or if someone you don't like has user-generated content, you go try to get DMCA'd keywords onto their page and watch them drop off search results.

Re: DMCA Copyright Complaint to Google

#129

Post by sarciszewski »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #126
sarciszewski wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't automated takedowns be considered null and void? If so, is there a way to allow firms that are known to send bogus automated takedowns be blacklisted? (i.e. you can always ignore them, if they try to push anything, you just point to their history of automated processes) Something. Anything. To discourage this behavior. To hit them where it hurts. (The wallet.)

They should. But MAFIAA loves automated takedowns, and they don't care if they're valid either. So it's likely not going to happen.

Fuck the MAFIAA, they're not the only one who matters. This is a problem for any US company.
Post reply on HN