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

Pollen tried to remove my article and Google is assisting with it

blog.pragmaticengineer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 139 posts

Re: Pollen tried to remove my article and Google is assisting with it

#111

Post by Terr_ »

nraynaud wrote: post #92
orliesaurus wrote: post #26

Does Google use GEMINI to handle these? The thing that stands out to me isn't even the fake identity or the fake country. It's that the incentives are completely backwards. Submitting a bogus DMCA is basically free. Google's cheapest option is to comply first and sort it out later. Meanwhile the person who did nothing wrong has to spend hours (or money) fixing it. That's a system where every incentive points toward a…

Funny, is recently searched “match plate in French“ the LLM went straight to match sticks and dinner plates, and the dummizer in search fixed “plate“ to “play“ and went into soccer territory. I still have no clue how the foundry pattern is called in my native language.

> fixed “plate“ to “play“ and went into soccer territory.

Well, a soccer search lets Google make more money by showing you more-profitable ads. /only-partial-sarcasm

Re: Pollen tried to remove my article and Google is assisting with it

#112

Post by ikeboy »

FireBeyond wrote: post #98
ikeboy wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We got told by the 9th circuit that false claims submitted under penalty of perjury are actually just "opinions" not capable of being proven true or false. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/22...

Yes, it's "I swear under penalty of perjury that it's my opinion that this infringes my copyright." Creator's rights need to be safeguarded but the DMCA gives legal weight to people without legal training and when they fuck it up (accidentally or intentionally) they get the no-consequence "but it's just, like, your opinion, man, and no-one expects you to be a lawyer".

In this case the statement they checked off said that there was an unlawful reproduction of a trademark. There was no reproduction at all, since the products were originally manufactured by the brand. Boggles my mind how that can be an opinion.

Re: Pollen tried to remove my article and Google is assisting with it

#113

Post by znpy »

mDyJzDPmBdG wrote: post #16
znpy wrote: post #13

> It seems that anyone can file a bogus copyright claim to get an article they don't like removed from Google's search index This has been known for years. Copyright has been abused for many many years in this sense. And Google is very well known for their completely absent human-in-the-loop support, so that doesn’t help either.

While that is true, and Google deserves are shaming they get for their terrible handling of DMCA, lets try to be real. Autoaccepting all DMCA takedown requests with zero verification is simplest and cheapest approach to be complaint. Failing to delete a file is tho only way to be on hook for any repercussions.

in the year of AI google could easily to a first round of review of DMCA complaints

and nonetheless, it's still on their side to act properly. it's not like they lack funds to pay people reviewing claims.

Re: Pollen tried to remove my article and Google is assisting with it

#114

Post by pseudalopex »

applfanboysbgon wrote: post #38
pibaker wrote: post #17

Ah, yes, you know someone's desperate when you see a bogus DMCA claim like this. Not the first time this happened and definitely won't be the last. This also demonstrates why it is bad for a law to mandate private entities to do moderation, in this case taking down copyright infringement materials when reported. Google, like basically all big platforms, doesn't care if a claim is fraudulent because the parties impact…

I fucking loathe the current DMCA regime with all of my being. That being said, it is currently the only chance of victims of revenge pornography getting any reprieve whatsoever. I think the solution needs to be to actually punish bad-faith actors rather than to make it more onerous to report violations. It is already illegal to file false DMCA claims, but it has literally never been enforced. Changing the laws doesn…

> That being said, it is currently the only chance of victims of revenge pornography getting any reprieve whatsoever.

It was in many cases. But there is a federal law for this now.[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TAKE_IT_DOWN_Act

Re: Pollen tried to remove my article and Google is assisting with it

#115

Post by JdeBP »

senadir wrote: post #44

It seems the BBC documentary link also returns a 404. https://www.mailplus.co.uk/tv-guide/tv/394562/crashed-800m-f...

That's a television guide for what's currently being broadcast, published by the Daily Mail, not the actual documentary from 2023.

Re: Pollen tried to remove my article and Google is assisting with it

#116

Post by JdeBP »

nkmnz wrote: post #53

Interestingly, the fourth highest ranking link on google for the CEOs name links to a 404: https://www.mailplus.co.uk/tv-guide/tv/394562/crashed-800m-f...

We probably should not read too much into the fact that the Daily Mail's guide to what's currently on television no longer lists a documentary from 2023. Except, perhaps, that the Daily Mail's search engine gaming is clearly quite effective.

Re: Pollen tried to remove my article and Google is assisting with it

#117

Post by scheme271 »

rawling wrote: post #100
lambdaone wrote: post #23

DMCA notices are meant to be submitted "under penalty of perjury", and false notices could in theory result in civil action being taken against those who send them. In practice, neither of these occur even if the sender is a real person, like a record company lawyer lending their name to complaint that are entirely computer generated, or, in this as in so many cases, a completely fabricated identity. Requiring verifi…

The "perjury" clause only applies to the claim to be authorised to act on behalf of the rights holder, not the claim that rights are being infringed https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/51541/has-anyone-bee...

In this case, the perjury may apply. It seems unlikely that the person that complained is acting on behalf of whoever owns the rights to a 25 year old article.

Re: Pollen tried to remove my article and Google is assisting with it

#120

Post by OkayPhysicist »

bradley13 wrote: post #108

DMCA takedowns should not exist. If it's important, get a court judgement, where the opposing party can present a defense. If it's not worth a court case, then it must not be very important. Or maybe they have no case.

DMCA takedowns, if they were actually followed to the letter of the law, would be much better than the current system. What's supposed to happen is Party A posts a video that Party B thinks infringes on their copyright on Platform C. B sends a DMCA claim to C. C takes down the content, and sends A a copy of the claim. A decides to fight the takedown, sends a counter claim to C. C reinstates the content, and sends the counterclaim to B.

A and B now have each other's information, and are free to sue each other.

The problem with the status quo is that the platforms are taking full advantage of the slack given between receiving notice and taking action for counterclaims, but acting immediately on claims.

Post reply on HN