Forum Moderators: open
"In response to a complaint we received under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed 10 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaint for these removed results."
way to go
[edited by: WebGuerrilla at 9:07 pm (utc) on Sep. 11, 2003]
[edit reason] No specifics please [/edit]
If you haven't, this is what it says in a nutshell:
If you are an ISP or online service provider, you may remove yourself from the threat of copyright litigation if you agree to promptly remove the disputed material.
If you choose not to remove it, the copyright owner can sue you as well as the person who originally violated the copyright.
By removing the page and posting the notificating, Google has compled with the law and they have also removed the potential for financial liability.
If it was your company, what would you do? Refuse, and spend the money to fight dozens of lawsuits each year?
it's just sad that se's, which after all shouldn't be held responsible for the content they spider, are being forced to censor their search results..
When it comes to specific searches, you should usually "widgetize" your descriptions, or generalized it to a specific area. You never know if the copyright owner and/or one of the recipients of a DMCA is a member here ;) So everyone tries to keep all the specifics into generic terms.
And there are plenty of search results in Google with those notices on the bottom, and Google has shown that for quite a while now.
[edited by: Marcia at 4:05 am (utc) on Sep. 12, 2003]
[edit reason] Minor edit, thanks Jen! [/edit]
Google Raises Volume on DMCA Takedown Actions [webmasterworld.com]
I have to say that I don't see why Google should censor it's SERPs. It seems that it's the offending site that should comply and if they are shut down then they won't be spidered next time and will fall out of the index. Problem solved.
I do think that it is pretty cool of Google to put the complaint linked to the SERPS. They could just delete the site and not say a word.
SN
[edited by: Marcia at 4:12 am (utc) on Sep. 12, 2003]
[edit reason] TOS - see stickymail, please. [/edit]
the freedom of speech rights in the US are only in effect so far as the congress of the US government is concerned... anything else is outside that purvue...
don't believe me? read it closely...
AMMENDMENT 1Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Congress shall make no law [...]
anything else is folks reading what isn't there...
"SHALL MAKE NO LAW"
A constitution defines what laws can and cannot be made. The first amendment ensures no laws are made (and I believe only congress can make laws) impeding free speech. If no low forbids free speech, free speech is legal, and that's all we're saying.
Of course I'm not american and haven't taken american politics, so I could be wrong, please correct me in that case.
SN
Suppose, for example, I design a new type roller-skate. I find I cannot get any major manufacturers interested so I set up a small workshop and decide to turn out a couple of dozen pairs a week and sell them via the internet. Let's suppose that I cannot keep up with demand and everyone wants a pair. All my competitors would have to do to destroy me would be to claim a patent infringement even if no such infringement existed.
Ok, I've used the example of a patent rather than copyright but the principles are the same (even if the law is not).
A reasonable compromise would be for Google to state in bold text that the website contains material that is the subject of a copyright dispute. They could even provide a link or two to sites relevant to the dispute. Simply stating that some results have been witheld seems a very poor practice to me.
Kaled.
They could even provide a link or two to sites relevant to the dispute. Simply stating that some results have been witheld seems a very poor practice to me.
Google does provide a link right to the actual complaint (they send copies to chillingeffects.org). You can read the dispute for yourself, and get the URL of the disputed page/site as well as that of the site/person that filed the DMCA in the first place.
And Chilling Effects has a ton of information on the DMCA as well, if you want to read a much condensed version ;)
That's all very well, but the number of visitors to the website may be reduced tenfold (or more). A small company may go bust before a dispute is settled.
I'm trying to make a living selling software. What am I supposed to do if MS decide to close me down my making a complaint against me under the DMCA. Currently, that's all MS would have to do. There need not be any legitimacy to their complaint but they would still have closed me down.
Kaled.
Jordan
If we remove or disable access to comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we will make a good-faith attempt to contact the owner or administrator of each affected site so that they may make a counter notification pursuant to sections 512(g)(2) and (3) of that Act. It is our policy to document all notices of alleged infringement on which we act. A copy of the notice will be sent to a third party who will make it available to the public.
A US corporation excercising due diligence to comply with US law--censorship? pfff...
What am I supposed to do if MS decide to close me down my making a complaint against me under the DMCA.
If this happens, you can file a counter claim if you feel that you have been wrongly accused. You can get the full details at www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/faq.cgi#QID132 The period for this is quite short, so it wouldn't get dragged out. But I am not sure if Google waits to see if a counter-claim is filed before removing the listings. A search and chilling effects would likely show if any of the removed listings had counter claims filed, or if it was just for ones that no counter claim was filed..
If you are selling software legally, you have nothing to worry about. If you are selling illegal software, I would be worried about more than just a DMCA notice and being booted from Google ;)
Once it is back, the two parties get to slug it out in court, and Gogle is exscused from the whole mess.
It's a strange world that considers information on how to pirate software is more dangerous that information on how to build a bomb.
Kaled.
At the end of they day Google are doing the right thing by removing the DMCA accused site from their index and cache.
If ya don't like it.....beat on your Senator, Congressman, and Governor....and GWB for the heck of it!
