Google: Censorship and Antitrust bully. We need a protest.

Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:40 pm

On the news that Google announcing they will downrank sites "with too many valid DMCA takedown notices". Since isoHunt is currently listed as #3 of most noticed sites, that is likely to happen to to us.

But let's get it out of the way that we are crying foul just because we are scared of losing traffic. About 75% of all our traffic are direct traffic, with 21% coming from Google searches (and much of that being searches on "isohunt" and "isohunt.com"). So even if Google takes isoHunt entirely out of their index, we'll survive. Unless Google start censoring isoHunt at the Chrome browser level, but let's not give them any ideas.

What I want to bring to attention about this search algorithm change is Google is no longer the search engine upstart they used to be (for a while now). As Search Engine Land says, Google is now a content distribution company. What's missing on Google's DMCA notices report? Youtube. The by far largest video content website in the world ought to have very high volume of DMCA notices, if not the most, and it's inconspicuously missing from the list. To downrank and censor any website that's not Google's that receives a high number of DMCA notices? Sounds exactly like antitrust to me.

Now, on what is "valid" DMCA notices to warrant Google labeling a site as pirate? Google Legal has already labelled us a "pirate" service before, to prop themselves up as "legit". That is their opinion. What is really wrong with downranking/censoring websites based on "valid" DMCA notices however is that what's valid is simply notices that has not been countered. With millions of links subject to notices, we never bothered countering any DMCA notices on Google (not to mention Google only recently put up their transparency report so there hasn't even been an easy way to review what's been noticed per domain). That does not mean all links under isohunt.com which Google has filtered by notices are valid, just because we haven't countered them. Not any more valid than how Youtube took down NASA's Mars video just because a broadcaster said so. Is what Google/Youtube routinely call valid takedowns valid, like many others before? You tell me. (although to Google's credit, a video of a Canadian urinating on his passport is too good to takedown, unlike a video from Mars)

To complicate matters, we are also a search engine, like Google, not just a regular website. We have our DMCA policy and takedown process, like Google. (ours was electronic by email years ago I might add, when Google was still requiring snail mail) And contrary to popular beliefs, we have plenty of torrent links to non-copyright infringing content, and we'll be adding 1.4M more from the Internet Archive soon. Is it right for Google to downrank or outright censor torrent links to legit, non-infringing content on isoHunt.com (or any other site), just because copyright holders have spammed a million "valid" DMCA notices on our other pages to Google that hasn't been countered? Censorship will never be easier, by DMCA spam.

The media conglomerates failed to pass SOPA, now they are getting in bed with Youtube at the public's expense. I'd point you to Google alternatives like DuckDuckGo (which respects your privacy a lot more to boot), or heck, bing but since everyone google, that's unlikely to go far in practice. While Google already started down this path of censorship with autocorrect before, search ranking based on mere DMCA notices is a line that should not be crossed.

We need a protest against Google censorship and antitrust.

Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:09 pm

Well put Gary. I was going to start a topic about the same thing, but you have covered way more ground. They (google) are not really bothered about copywrite laws/infringing content as much as they are about monopolising the internet for themselves. Changing rankings will not deter searching, but will only encourage people to employ cleverer ways of searching.

You mention Youtube, possibly one of the biggest sites for infringing content, notable by its absence from the list....how many times have we clicked on a vid to find it has been deleted due to infringing content??

IH wrote:

The media conglomerates failed to pass SOPA, now they are getting in bed with Youtube at the public's expense. I'd point you to Google alternatives like DuckDuckGo (which respects your privacy a lot more to boot), or heck, bing but since everyone google, that's unlikely to go far in practice. While Google already started down this path of censorship with autocorrect before, search ranking based on DMCA notices is a line that should not be crossed. We need a protest against Google censorship and antitrust.

Duckduckgo is brilliant, and a great alternative to google. Sure, it isnt as intuitive as google, but with such an excellent privacy policy, who cares>

Shame on you google. Rolling Eyes

Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:11 pm

hear hear!!!!! i wonder if they have been talking to sony as they also like pi**ing off the people whom use them!!

Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:23 pm

Any new search engine to choose from that won't inflict too much on my right to search for popular P2P sites and the likes, I'll give notice to them. I am always looking for new ways of improving my browsing capabilities as well as keeping my online life as private as possible with the least bit of trouble from sites tracking my whereabouts to stealing my private information and selling them to the highest bidder.

You go girl.. i mean Mr Fung.. i mean IH .... awkward.. Embarassed

Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 5:45 pm

Lots of blogger accounts

with copywrite laws/infringing content on the web for years...Some people also store info hashes of torrents in blogger accounts and a google hash check will sometimes bring them up..
I also use DuckDuckGo sometimes its not bad.

Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 5:54 pm

I agree that this issue should indeed be protested. The internet is for the interconnection of the entire human race. The transferring of computer data like bit torrents are completely innocent. Yes they do indeed lead to people not buying CDs DVDs and such. Messing with the profits of a corporation should not be a crime in a democratic society. It is a societal shift, and evolution of media, and the motion picture industry should adapt.

Although there are easy ways of getting around law-manipulated search engines, the issue that we are facing is very significant. It is as significant as the wall street protests.

I pledge my support for the free distribution of ideas and other such media. I am a relative of Marshal McLuhan. I am David McLuhan. I say that the medium should not be muffled. Not when it is just transferring innocent information.

If a protest should be organized I stand behind it.

- David McLuhan

Contact:

pulse
at
cogeco.ca

IH wrote:

On the news that Google announcing they will downrank sites "with too many valid DMCA takedown notices". Since isoHunt is currently listed as #3 of most noticed sites, that is likely to happen to to us.

But let's get it out of the way that we are crying foul just because we are scared of losing traffic. About 75% of all our traffic are direct traffic, with 21% coming from Google searches (and much of that being searches on "isohunt" and "isohunt.com"). So even if Google takes isoHunt entirely out of their index, we'll survive. Unless Google start censoring isoHunt at the Chrome browser level, but let's not give them any ideas.

What I want to bring to attention about this search algorithm change is Google is no longer the search engine upstart they used to be (for a while now). As Search Engine Land says, Google is now a content distribution company. What's missing on Google's DMCA notices report? Youtube. The by far largest video content website in the world ought to have very high volume of DMCA notices, if not the most, and it's inconspicuously missing from the list. To downrank and censor any website that's not Google's that receives a high number of DMCA notices? Sounds exactly like antitrust to me.

Now, on what is "valid" DMCA notices to warrant Google labeling a site as pirate? Google Legal has already labelled us a "pirate" service before, to prop themselves up as "legit". That is their opinion. What is really wrong with downranking/censoring websites based on "valid" DMCA notices however is that what's valid is simply notices that has not been countered. With millions of links subject to notices, we never bothered countering any DMCA notices on Google (not to mention Google only recently put up their transparency report so there hasn't even been an easy way to review what's been noticed per domain). That does not mean all links under isohunt.com which Google has filtered by notices are valid, just because we haven't countered them. Not any more valid than how Youtube took down NASA's Mars video just because a broadcaster said so. Is what Google/Youtube routinely call valid takedowns valid, like many others before? You tell me. (although to Google's credit, a video of a Canadian urinating on his passport is too good to takedown, unlike a video from Mars)

To complicate matters, we are also a search engine, like Google, not just a regular website. We have our DMCA policy and takedown process, like Google. (ours was electronic by email years ago I might add, when Google was still requiring snail mail) And contrary to popular beliefs, we have plenty of torrent links to non-copyright infringing content, and we'll be adding 1.4M more from the Internet Archive soon. Is it right for Google to downrank or outright censor torrent links to legit, non-infringing content on isoHunt.com (or any other site), just because copyright holders have spammed a million "valid" DMCA notices on our other pages to Google that hasn't been countered? Censorship will never be easier, by DMCA spam.

The media conglomerates failed to pass SOPA, now they are getting in bed with Youtube at the public's expense. I'd point you to Google alternatives like DuckDuckGo (which respects your privacy a lot more to boot), or heck, bing but since everyone google, that's unlikely to go far in practice. While Google already started down this path of censorship with autocorrect before, search ranking based on mere DMCA notices is a line that should not be crossed.

We need a protest against Google censorship and antitrust.

Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 6:16 pm

I think a good protest would be to have a mass switching to another search engine of choice. Instead of a site blackout, a user blackout, causing google a significant loss of traffic. Easy to get folks interested in this idea I think, but not so easy for the average user to know how to implement this and to do it at the same time. I think a protest google page, with option to run script to change default search engine on xx date and to user choice of search engine would be a good start. Could even set in a duration then have option to revert back to default?

For those wanting to punish google now, add google.com to your peerblock filter list and bye bye google. I like to add it to my router that way I know they are not getting any traffic from me. Wink

If everybody was to do that and block google-analytics then the mighty google would fall.

Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 8:49 pm

The film industry has been a protected profit making machine for years and in most cases that, has made many people very very rich,mainly spoiled brats of actors,some of whom earn $25mill plus a movie.This is protectionism of the film industry by greedy a-holes whom want nothing but to protect their opulent lifestyles,while the rest of us have to pay big dollars at the movies and over inflated prices for dvds,cds. Stick it right up them i say.

Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2012 8:36 am

Google is now deciding its a content provider, so that leaves a gaping hole in the search engine array. since ISO is an index site, its not a far streatch from being a search engine. Any plans in order yet to lever into the google vacuum and try the search engine business? I think google could end up shooting itself as people usually trickle away from monopolies that whittle away services, and clip coins in our pockets to a larger degree

Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:43 pm

Mozilla (Firefox) seems to have follwed suit (as have Avast). I.E., as much as I dislike it, seems to still work though.

Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2012 2:51 pm

While I enjoy most of Google's products and services, they are taking advantage of several users's rights so I am on this 100%.

Some one should create one of those petition and we could all sign.

Cheers

Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2012 9:37 pm

I agree and have already taken a first step into the matter. I am no longer using Google as a search engine and have decided to switch to duckduckgo and give it a whirl. It is now my default home page and will continue to be because we have to make the stand now and a message needs to be sent. The internet is meant for free flow of information and we all have a right to use it.

Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2012 10:00 pm

good for you. Googling is a hard habit to break and to de-verb.

Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 8:09 am

IH wrote:

good for you. Googling is a hard habit to break and to de-verb.

I absolutely agree... 'Google it...' is one of the most popular sentences nowadays...
If You find time please read:

A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace
https://projects.eff.org/~barlow/Declaration-Final.html

Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:24 am

I have only one question in all of this!

Were you disappointed that you were not #1 in the list ?

Cool