Google Drive flags file only containing “1” for copyright infringement

Post by a_f » Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 11:24 PM UTC

TillE wrote: post #259

folbec wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My bet is someone did a DMCA claim on a file containing 1, either by mistake or as a joke. Then Automated Stupidity took over.

I'd guess some giant folder of mostly-copyrighted material, which happened to include those files for some reason.

Post by Barrin92 » Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 11:30 PM UTC

OneLeggedCat wrote: post #205

tyingq wrote: post #15

I'm curious if it was related to the file name. I created a few 1-byte files with just "1" in them, with different names, including "output04.txt". No problems so far. Also uploaded variations with "\n" and "\r\n" after the "1". And enabled sharing to anyone with the link. No issues so far. Google drive does support metadata like a description and comments. I wonder if someone posted some copyrighted text in a commen…

Just tested this myself. Got the same results as you while using different file names. Difficult to believe that Google has become so internally dysfunctional that it hasn't fixed this technical embarrassment twenty hours after first being being seen, and then five hours after being reported on front page of Hacker News.

Post by tyingq » Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 11:33 PM UTC

bonzini wrote: post #165

cgrealy wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given it's almost certainly a ruleset generated by an ml agent, it's more likely to be a change in the training data.

Or just don't flag any file below 100 bytes.

Post by rst » Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 11:34 PM UTC

tyingq wrote: post #15

I'm curious if it was related to the file name. I created a few 1-byte files with just "1" in them, with different names, including "output04.txt". No problems so far. Also uploaded variations with "\n" and "\r\n" after the "1". And enabled sharing to anyone with the link. No issues so far. Google drive does support metadata like a description and comments. I wonder if someone posted some copyrighted text in a commen…

Post by panarky » Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 11:38 PM UTC

Qub3d wrote: post #210

panarky wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they explicitly reserve the right to do so in their TOSes Do you have an example of Google explicitly reserving the right to delete any/all data with no notice and for no reason?

https://edit.tosdr.org/points/14762 Note the wording "we reasonably believe". There is nothing objective about this. Additionally: https://policies.google.com/terms#toc-removing > Removing your content > If any of your content (1) breaches these terms, service-specific additional terms or policies, (2) violates applicable law, or (3) could harm our users, third parties, or Google, then we reserve the right to take do…