A link provided by an Anonymous Coward has provided a story that we have heard several times recently - hyperlinks being removed after being claimed as a DMCA violation when it is patently clear to everyone that the claim is simply not true.
The takedown request seeks to remove links to a number of torrent URLS that are alleged to infringe on Paramount movie 'Transformers: Age of Extinction'. The link is actually to an Ubuntu 12.04 iso disk image. I am amazed that anyone with even a modicum of reading skills can imagine a link between the Ubuntu software and the film in question.
Cited in a DMCA takedown request filed against Google on behalf of Paramount Pictures, and spotted by TorrentFreak (and tipped to us by reader ~nonanonymous) is an innocuous link to a 32-bit alternate install image Ubuntu 12.04.2 LTS.
The takedown request seeks to remove links to a number of torrent URLS that are alleged to infringe on Paramount movie 'Transformers: Age of Extinction'.
Ubuntu clearly doesn't. All it takes is a quick glance at the URL in question to see that. It's very much a stock iso of an old Ubuntu release.
And yet Google has complied with the request and scrubbed the link to the page in question from its search index.
But don't hate on Google for this. The sheer volume of DMCA requests Google is made to process by copyright holders is gargantuan: over three million 'pirate' URLs per day, say TorrentFreak.
Being a European, I am also amazed that there is little or no penalty for making incorrect claims, which probably explains why Google are receiving over 300 million claims a day. Why should anyone stop? There is simply no cost to those who make the claims regardless as to whether they are accurate or not. Why aren't US businesses, indeed any business worldwide, up in arms about this practice which could adversely affect their own ability to trade and ultimately, reduce their profits? I realise that this doesn't necessarily apply to Ubuntu, but with such a large number of DMCA claims I imagine that there must have been many false claims that have affected legitimate businesses.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by MrGuy on Tuesday September 13 2016, @05:12PM
Sure. How about YouTube's FAQ on the subject? [google.com]
You're correct that under the DCMA content in theory CAN be restored once a counter-notice is received. In practice, it is frequently not.
(Score: 2) by Fnord666 on Tuesday September 13 2016, @08:53PM
(C) replaces the removed material and ceases disabling access to it not less than 10, nor more than 14, business days following receipt of the counter notice, unless its designated agent first receives notice from the person who submitted the notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) that such person has filed an action seeking a court order to restrain the subscriber from engaging in infringing activity relating to the material on the service provider’s system or network.
emphasis mine.
As part of the safe harbor provision, the OSP/ISP must restore the content no later than 14 days after receiving a counter-claim unless they receive notice of a formal lawsuit filed by the claimant.
(Score: 2) by arslan on Wednesday September 14 2016, @02:36AM
So... this seems like a loophole for an easy solution against the MAFIAA.. someone please write a bot to auto-generate counter claims for that gazillion a day notice Google and like gets.
Are those claims that Google and like receive open for public?
For added fun, the bot can also generate new claims against any known MAFIAA content, sites, resources, etc.