Google to Lay the Hammer Down on DMCA Takedown Violators

[steelballs]

Google to Lay the Hammer Down on DMCA Takedown Violators

Google just announced that, starting next week, its search algorithm will start taking a new signal into account: the number of valid copyright removal notices it receives for a given site. According to Google, ?this ranking change should help users find legitimate, quality sources of content more easily.? The idea here is obviously to punish pirate sites by pushing links to them down on Google?s search results pages and to appease copyright holders who often claim that Google doesn?t do enough to remove links to copyrighted material.

To see more on this breaking news read
http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/10/google-search-algorithm-copyright-removal-notices/

 

[Execute]

Quite a good idea in theory but they fail to understand that they aren't the only search engine. People will just move over to Bing or similar to find movies which will start to chip away at their market share.

 

[blueflame]

It's true. If google gets involved with "copyright" stuff, I think we might see a shift onto other search engines. All depends on if people feel that google is getting progressively 'shittier'.

 

[Julius Caesar]

Do you really think that people searching for copyright material that is not the original owners will really know that google no longer ranks these websites? I think not. I respect G for making these changes.

 

[bovaum]

that sounds more like a legal defensive move than anything else

I've seen various reports of complaints that google doesn't do enough to protect copyrighted material -- then again there are some people with significant resources that don't understand how an algorithm works and assume that because searching for a given song turning up a torrent site is intentional

 

[motzart]

Overall I like this change, I support SEO like blackhat/greyhat but I don't agree with stealing people's content and work.

 

[derzok]

that sounds more like a legal defensive move than anything else

Absolutely - I host a website where people often post copyrighted material. I have a policy against it, but it doesn't tend to stop people. I get complaints from my host all the time - 9 times out of 10 they cite a google DMCA complaint. I think google does it for legal purposes - so that people don't say "oh well google is supporting piracy by giving the pirates a way to spread their content." If they make a reasonable effort to NOT display that content, then they can alleviate some of the legal responsibility of listing pirating websites.

That, and I'm sure they're rubbing a few congressmen and legislators the right way when they join their campaigns for anti-piracy laws. I'm sure google gets something out of it (off the record, of course). This country is run by lobbyists you know.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

This is a great news given by google and a great help for those internet users...

 

[poweronics]

Interesting news from Google. Lets see what trend does the stealers adopt against it.

 

[SnowWar]

This is really a good step which is taken by google. Google should had done this a lot earlier. This will definitely make way for the legal site and content owners.

 

[celiaingranada]

When you are the biggest guy in the sandbox, they want you to set the example plus if the copyright holders want to go after someone wouldn't they go after the person with the deepest pockets?

 

[rickydzine]

And in turn this will make it harder for those sites to get shut down and easier for people who promote their site other than google! I call it a win win!

 

[Kimi]

Sounds interesting, it's clear that Google wants quality and important sites in top.

 

[loveBHseo]

I made a post earlier on this (got buried in the noise). Nevertheless, it seems that it can be a BH tool to demote your competitors website by flooding the automated system with DMCA complaints which G will then begin to weigh against your competitors and start to drop their SERPs leaving you to cash out while chilling as the highest result. This is a very real possibility as at the moment this is an automated system with little recourse for websites to complain that their websites do not have anything copyrighted on it and get bounced back to wherever they used to be. If it is a coordinated attack it can be done masterfully with a super high payout in a very short time.

 

[ookami007]

Overall I like this change, I support SEO like blackhat/greyhat but I don't agree with stealing people's content and work.

If you can show me an instance of anyone "stealing" someone's copyrighted material... I'd love to see it. Stealing means to deprive someone of something. If I STEAL your TV... you don't have it anymore.

You can't STEAL someone's copyrighted work... they still have it... can still sell it... can still profit from it.

You CAN violate their artificial government granted monopoly - that's call copyright violation. It's about as much steal as someone who snaps a picture of a bank stealing the bank. The bank is still there. People can still use the bank.

PLEASE.... get your facts before vommiting the Big Media (RIAA / MPAA)'s propaganda.

And I say this as someone who holds copyrights on both books, cd's and mobile apps. If you build a product someone likes... they will buy it. Maybe not at first, but as they continue to see value in it... they will. Or you'll get a referral or you'll get a new customer who buys your other products.

Getting upset about someone "stealing" something that can't be stolen is just... well... idiotic and short-sighted.

 

[NotTheDude]

I made a post earlier on this (got buried in the noise). Nevertheless, it seems that it can be a BH tool to demote your competitors website by flooding the automated system with DMCA complaints which G will then begin to weigh against your competitors and start to drop their SERPs leaving you to cash out while chilling as the highest result. This is a very real possibility as at the moment this is an automated system with little recourse for websites to complain that their websites do not have anything copyrighted on it and get bounced back to wherever they used to be. If it is a coordinated attack it can be done masterfully with a super high payout in a very short time.

This was my first thought.

 

[phatzilla]

Do you really think that people searching for copyright material that is not the original owners will really know that google no longer ranks these websites? I think not. I respect G for making these changes.

eventually word will get out.

 

[phatzilla]

Overall I like this change, I support SEO like blackhat/greyhat but I don't agree with stealing people's content and work.

This isnt going to affect the small fry site owners who steal content, this is purely Google getting into bed with the Hollywood / content providers

If you can show me an instance of anyone "stealing" someone's copyrighted material... I'd love to see it. Stealing means to deprive someone of something. If I STEAL your TV... you don't have it anymore.

You can't STEAL someone's copyrighted work... they still have it... can still sell it... can still profit from it.

You CAN violate their artificial government granted monopoly - that's call copyright violation. It's about as much steal as someone who snaps a picture of a bank stealing the bank. The bank is still there. People can still use the bank.

PLEASE.... get your facts before vommiting the Big Media (RIAA / MPAA)'s propaganda.

And I say this as someone who holds copyrights on both books, cd's and mobile apps. If you build a product someone likes... they will buy it. Maybe not at first, but as they continue to see value in it... they will. Or you'll get a referral or you'll get a new customer who buys your other products.

Getting upset about someone "stealing" something that can't be stolen is just... well... idiotic and short-sighted.

This guy understands

 

[redclover]

Google is going to keep at it until people decide to leave.

RedClover

 

[deviatus]

If G actually enforced this automatically as a signal, YouTube would get bumped to the last page.