Comments on: Google Must Change Its Policy About Copyright Infringement Notification

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 19:14:00 +0000

Interesting article. The DMCA is very important, although it does need more work to keep up with changes in technology. I noticed a number of comments exhibiting substantial confusion too.

For any company dealing with high volume, efficient procedures are extremely important, as is authenticating concerns to avoid even greater issues. But as a matter of legal right, one cannot be legitimately denied what is provide by law or statute with the addition of any steps or requirements not specified in the law or statue itself.

Simply put, electronic submissions have to be allowed for NOCIs if such is allowed, not prohibited, and meets the requirements of the DMCA. If it doesn’t, then it doesn’t have to be allowed.

In the case of Google, an additional requirement may be even more problematic. They state they automatically post NOCIs on another site and may publish it in their search results. Two problems here:

1) If this is a stipulation and requirement to process and act on a legitimate NOCI, then it contains an extra clause and stipulation not required by the DMCA. Denying an NOCI on this basis means that Google would not likely be protected by any safe harbor clauses of the DMCA and increases the likelihood of being found liable for infringement in any fair court of law. (I say “fair” because I’ve seen at least one court decision that is extremely suspicious, and judges aren’t perfect in understanding or implying the law. They are human after all).

2) Automatically publishing an NOCI without express permission of the IP holder is itself potentially an IP violation and certainly a privacy violation. The IP violation seems likely (although again, courts haven’t seemed a bit “wishy-washy” about communication and copyrights. Google’s current published processes are at least ironic, definitely problematic, and potentially more than just problematic.

By: jas

jas — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 02:04:13 +0000

You really have no understanding of laws in this country.

google is not doing anything wrong here.

By: Bill in Detroit

Bill in Detroit — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 18:00:45 +0000

@the sploggers reading this:
If anyone wants to copy up to 20% of every one of my posts, I’m fine with that — so long as they also include a ‘dofollow’ link back to the source.
.
@everyone else:
Frankly, if the matter isn’t big enough to reduce it to paper, sign and stamp it, it isn’t big enough to worry Google with. Once they get the letter, even the most cursory of investigations into your allegation is going to cost them many multiples of what you have involved. And they HAVE to do some sort of investigation into the matter, because they have to justify what they have done to the splogger. If your claim was false, then they have harmed an innocent party merely on your false accusation. One of the posters above pointed to exactly that circumstance.
.
Some of the posters have been rallying around the war cry of “Responsibility”. Well, the very first responsibility is for you to write the take down letter. Google ain’t your nanny. That’s YOUR copyright, not Googles … get in there and protect it!

By: Jimmy Bergmark

Jimmy Bergmark — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 22:46:42 +0000

Great to see in the comments that there is a way to email Google as well.

By: Associate Money

Associate Money — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 07:42:22 +0000

A lot of content has actually been rehashed on the net. Just the topic of attracting traffic has been done to death. I have come across similar top-ten lists on StumbleUpon several times.

I guess Google is aware of the problem and the “roadblocks” are just to deter frivolous claims and subsequent counter-claims.