Slashdot Log In
Google Relists Operation Clambake
Posted by
timothy
on Thu Mar 21, 2002 09:41 PM
from the squeaky-wheels dept.
from the squeaky-wheels dept.
DarkZero writes: "After almost every tech site and individual geek banded together to either carry the story about Google's delisting of Operation Clambake or flat-out protest it, Google has apparently relisted Xenu.net. Searches for 'xenu' and 'scientology' list Operation Clambake as the first and fourth results, respectively. The search for "scientology" also lists a story from C|Net about Google delisting Operation Clambake, as well as a protest ad from a Kuro5hin reader (oc3)." Update: 03/22 12:52 GMT by M : We jumped the gun. Google only relisted Xenu.net's homepage (where the copyright claims by Scientology were clearly bogus), not the rest of the pages listed in Scientology's DMCA complaint. Some Google sysadmin is getting aggravated because every 20 minutes, another memo from management is coming down telling him to alter the live database.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Damn it! (Score:5, Funny)
Guess I need to spend some more money to get to OT-3.
- A.P.
Re:Damn it! (Score:5, Informative)
If you don't know the long history of Scientology using technical means (e.g. issuing bogus rmgroups and spamming critical newsgroups) or legal means (e.g. the "Tom Cruise missile" incident,) or bizarre means (trying to frame a journalist as a bomber, maybe killing a judge's dog, the "bladders of blood, I was nearly raped incident," you should sit back, do a Google search, read the pages, and remember that your moderation points last for three days.
In summary, the above post was not a troll, it was, if anything, insightful or funny.
Parent
Re:Damn it! (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps you are't clear?
What's your misunderstood word?
I think this auditing course, which only costs
Parent
stand behind 'em folks (Score:4, Insightful)
Let the flames begin.
Frightening (Score:3, Interesting)
This without having any serious followers in governmental leadership positions.
Re:Frightening (Score:3, Insightful)
Scientology's power is really not that odd, considering its size and money. Scientology isn't as powerful as the Roman Catholic Church, of course, but then again, the Scientologists have never been able to pull off massive crusades or inquisitions.
It's all relative.
Re:Frightening (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Frightening (Score:4, Insightful)
I usually stay out of religious issues, but this one was too nice to pass...
Be it roman catholic, orthodox, islam or budhism, they do not REQUIRE you to sink large amount of money into their coffers. As far as I can understand, $cientology requires money from it's sheeps^H^H^H^H^H^Hfollowers in order to attend, and progress in the so called "religion".
Furthermore, they're a religion only in the US if I'm correct, being rated anywhere from cult to scam everywhere else in the world. Plus, no amount of money will get you higher up in roman catholic religion. Even if you invest billions you'll never become pope.
Makes me sad for all those who got swindled into becoming $cientologists... Exploitation of human misery at its best. I cannot believe that all their members have joined willingly without being somewhat brainwashed...
Parent
Re:Frightening (Score:5, Funny)
Yay for p2p religions!
(That's when everyone you talk to seems to be slower than you and it takes a long time to get the message across).
graspee
Parent
Go sign the petition to have them investigated!! (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
It's out of control! (Score:4, Funny)
It's alive I tell you! Alive! And it's hungry for pages to index! Tell it not to index a page, to exclude a page completely from its memory and it will certainly do the exact opposite. Bullying and threats will only provoke it! It has the collective knowledge and power of the internet to draw upon (neatly indexed, I might add)! It's unstopable!
I warned you! For years I have been speaking about the perils of advanced Search Engine technology. But mine was a voice in the wilderness. Now, the truth is revealed, but it's too late!
ITS TOOO LATE!!! ARGH...
Re:It's out of control! (Score:4, Funny)
And Google fights back.
Parent
Hooray! (Score:5, Insightful)
I made an ad also (Score:5, Insightful)
Not only that ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Not only that ... (Score:4, Funny)
Back in the early days of alt.religion.scientology, they would talk about something called "Operation Footbullet [xenu.net]".
From the website: "Operation Foot Bullet, a joke at Scientology's expense; the Scientologists who's job it is to "contribute" to ARS often seem to be doing so poorly, it's as if they're shooting themselves in the foot. Humourously named after the seriously criminal Operation Freakout and Operation Snow White."
"...explanation from Google on today's turbulent events."
Shouldn't that be enturbulent events? Har.
Parent
The source of the ad... (Score:5, Informative)
The ad was bought by Kuro5hin [kuro5hin.org] user oc3 [kuro5hin.org]. Apparently his actions were quite popular [kuro5hin.org].
Parent
Please don't feed the scientologists (Score:4, Funny)
Don't you know the more you antagonise scientologists, the more likely it is that John Travolta will make good on his threat to do a sequel to 'Battlefield Earth'
I mean throughout history some terrible atrocities have been carried out in the name of religion, but to invite a sequel to BE is pure insanity.
:)
Scientology and Southpark (Score:5, Interesting)
Scientology and The Daily Show (Score:5, Interesting)
They're brave enough to mock anyone in power and put total strangers on the spot, but the CoS is just too risky.
Parent
I'll say it again... (Score:4, Insightful)
I have no clue about scientology, but interrestingly, I hear only negative thing about them on the net, I've yet to see scientology and a positive claim, that's kinda scary, if they want a positive image, it's not by going after every bitcher that they will do good, Good is done by DOING good things, but I guess we all know that....
No, they'll never wake up (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:I'll say it again... (Score:5, Funny)
First time I drove past that, I was laughing so hard I nearly drove off the road.
Parent
Why would they want to censor google anyway? (Score:3, Insightful)
Surely someone who can create such a system (that controls that many people at once by making them feel elite while unashamedly robbing them blind) would be smart enough to realise that censoring anti-scientology sites just makes them more credible? Or perhaps as the clambake site suggests, he's starting to believe his own propaganda?
For me at least, I would have dismissed the clambake site as another crackpot venting steam, were it not apparently censored. Now I'm taking clambake a bit more seriously
Re:Why would they want to censor google anyway? (Score:3, Funny)
I'm not sure he's got a lot of say in it, since he's been dead since 1986.
Unless, of course, you buy the CoS propaganda.
Re:Why would they want to censor google anyway? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm glad Google has come around and done the right thing, but I'm disappointed that they ever gave in to the wack jobs in the first place.
Question: if the secret teachings of the Scientologists are actually ancient knowledge handed down by superior beings, wouldn't the copyright period have already expired? If the works *are* copyrightable, doesn't that indicate that the documents are a new creation authored in the last 75 years? Hmmm....
Google should just sensor the keyword instead? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Google should just sensor the keyword instead? (Score:5, Interesting)
Think about it: Google is the premier search engine of the net these days. They're the search engine behind a number of big sites, like Yahoo and Earthlink. That's quite a bit of power that they wield.
So when the CoS wants to play hardball with the DMCA as a club, the guys at Google could say "sure, we'll be happy to comply with your request to remove links and cache entries that point to that material. Of course, we'll also have to remove all of our links and cache entries for your sites and any pages that happen to refer to your organization in a positive light, just to be sure. Can't be too careful, you know". Of course, they'll leave the links and cache entries pointing to pages and sites that are anti-CoS up. And also put up the message that you mention as an explanation that the search isn't the completely objective thing that people are looking for, and why.
And suddenly, the CoS becomes a non-presence on the net.
And Google could give the same treatment to anyone who threatens them.
Unfair, you say? Well, Google is a privately owned company and the resources that are used to cache this stuff are theirs to manage as they see fit, right?
Lesson: don't screw with a powerful entity that wishes to remain objective. They might decide to not be objective about you anymore, and you might not like that at all.
Parent
And the slashdot comments? (Score:5, Interesting)
Another success (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://www.xenu.net/archive/footbullet/
<Nelson Munts>HA-Ha</Nelson Munts>
Oh this ad idea is fun! (Score:5, Interesting)
Separation of editors and advertisers. Sometimes it's almost as strong as separation of church and state (although like church/state it's not absolute). In fact, a lot of sites pride themselves on the fact that editors can air stories even if it pisses off advertisers.
Well why the hell not have it work in the other direction? Why not use advertising to bypass editorial waffling or censorship?
Look at it this way. Let's say we all chipped in $5 each to create a fund to ensure that Xenu.Net showed up for every even-remotely related Scientology link (ie, Scientology, Travola, Dianetics, Bukkake, etc). Now, does Scientology have the legal right to tell Google they can't run those ads (thus depriving Google of its income). Couldn't Google argue that pulling ads that have been paid for would damage its business?
What about extending the principle to other sites like Yahoo, or heck the NY Times. The way I see it, all Scientology could do is threaten to boycott Google/Yahoo/NY Times...they routinely ignore boycotts from groups all the time. Or they could pay to run ads countering the Xenu ads.
Well of course I don't know for sure if things would be this simple but...you know, why can't we geeks take a page from the Corporate Dirty Playbook...fight with advertising.
I'm all for giving money to the EFF but I think I would almost rather spend my money creating an ad campaign...along the lines of TheTruth ads you see against the tobacco industry. I mean, even smokers curse Big Tobacco out the side of their mouth as they buy another pack. The Tobacco Industry has a PR nightmare...so why can't Disney or Scientology or the MPAA or RIAA?
I've got $20 right here I'll pitch in.
- JoeShmoe
.
Re:Oh this ad idea is fun! (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure, they get some advertising. Like anyone with half a brain isn't going to laugh them off anyway.
Parent
Go Google! (Score:4, Insightful)
Danny.
Re:Go Google! (Score:3, Interesting)
Here is an image that is absolutely irreplaceable in criticizing 'Scientology' and I'll include the commentary here...
David Miscavige - otherwise available in his guise as a poodle at http://laugh.at/scientology - leading his acolytes up the 'Escalator to Total Freedom'.
http://members.tripod.com/zinjifar0/esc01.jpg
Somehow, I suspect Slashdot will hear about this link
Zinj
Let's get Xenu to #1 on Google listings ... (Score:3, Interesting)
If everyone who has a webpage creates a link to xenu.net then won't that boost Xenu.com's ranking on Google? Then if someone searches for Scientology Xenu would appear first
Correspondance from Google (Score:5, Informative)
I am highly concerned about the recent slashdot.org story that your company has recently removed scientology information from your index, select pages from xenu.net and operation clambake.org. It shocks me that all it takes is one letter to knock an opposing voice out of the arena. This will seriously ruin your search engines reputation, especially in the 1st ammendment society we live in.
From Google:
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 23:20:31 -0000
From: "The Google Team"
Subject: Re: xenu.net delisting. [#201603]
To: "Electrawn"
Thank you for your note about the Xenu.net website.
Google takes the first amendment very seriously. We are also obligated to
follow the laws of the land. We removed some pages of the Xenu.net
website from our search engine earlier this week in response to a
copyright infringement notification under the Digital Millenium Copyright
Act (DMCA). It is not within our discretion as a company to decide when
to conform to the DMCA and when to ignore it. As the DMCA mandates, Google
also provides webmasters with the ability to have their content reinstated
if they submit a counter notification to Google. Until that action is
taken, we will comply with the DMCA and keep the contested pages out of
our index. If you'd like more information on this topic, you can find it
here:
www.google.com/dmca.html or by searching Google for "DMCA"
(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859
We appreciate your interest in this issue and your taking the time to
express your opinion.
Sincerely,
The Google Team
Protest at Google (Score:5, Informative)
Overall, Google is handled this in a poor, timid manner. First, one of Google's lawyers (seemingly by himself) decided there might be some liability to Google so they should de-list xenu. Only after xenu was de-listed and Rotten (among others) wrote a story about it, did Google reconsider. Google is a relatively small company and not looking to get involved in some ideological dispute over scientology or the DMCA. They are vulnerable to bigger entities in the legal arena. As a result, what they are doing is providing a means to copyright holders to complain about offending material. The means of complaint is basically a legally binding affadavit throwing the liability back at the complainer(?) to provent frivolous complaints.
Re:Protest at Google (Score:5, Insightful)
With all do respect, you are giving far too negative picture about the meeting. First of all they were very sincere that they didn't handle this in a best possible manner, but in the future they'll try to improve their processes. Their lawyer did first what lawyers normally do in this kind of situations and played on the safe side - he has to worry about the shareholders interest etc. He later noticed that most of CO$'s demands were actually based on trademark-violations, not copyright and based on that Google had an opportunity to restore Xenu.net. The fact that they actually did this on their own is something that we really be happy with. This kind of behaviour is anything but typical in today's corporate world.
And about the ranks, at least to me the message was clear, Google tries to write as good as possible algorithms as possible, which don't require human intervention to filter spamming etc.
V.
Parent
Petition for DOJ Investigation (Score:5, Informative)
Well, well, well... upon hearing this news, my first thought was of disgust - disgust that Google would help Scientology censor xenu.net into oblivion. However I couldn't help but wonder... who leaked the news to the media? If it was Google who informed the media about this while complying with the law, then I must admit it's a nice way to stir up the controversy and to inform people who/what Scientologists are really like. So.. who leaked? :)
While lurking around on Xenu.net [xenu.net], I saw that there's a petition to ask the DOJ to investigate the Church[sic] of Scientology. I signed it. How about you?
DOJ Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/cofs1/petition.html [petitiononline.com]
Getting on the soapbox for a second to rant a bit(since everyone else is doing it, why not?)
A comparision was made between Scientology and Al-Quaeda earlier on in this forum. Please! Let's be realistic here... Al-Quaeda isn't that bad! :) At least they're honest when they say "Death to America!" while trying to kill you. With Scientology... well... they infiltrate. They smile and pretend to be your friend while reaching for your wallet. They play with your emotions. If you catch them in the act and try to speak out about it, they try (and usually succeed) to destroy your life. This is even in their DOCTRINE for crying out loud! They're the ultimate mind-fuckers.
From dictionary.com [dictionary.com]:
terrorism Pronunciation Key (tr-rzm) n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
So... if Scientology doesn't fall under this definition, just what IS terrorism anyway?
Not Quite a Victory (Score:5, Informative)
However, Google is still allowing Paquette to exploit a contradictory flaw in the DMCA by honoring the rest of the complaint. (I tried searching about 15 other links directly on Google, and all came up dead - so I can't say unilaterally that Google is blocking all of the urls, but they're at least blocking all 15 of a random sampling.)
The key contradiction within the Act itself appears to be the vastly different indemnity offered to ISPs versus that provided for search engines, or as the Act refers to them, "information retrieval tools." Under the DMCA, once notified of links to infringing content, a search engine is required to disable access to the material in question pending a counternotification from the accused infringer - which was what was demanded of the xenu.net site author despite the fact that such a counternotification would have required a citizen of Norway to submit to the jurisdiction of a US federal court.
However, in a recent ruling dealing with the liability of AOL [newsbytes.com], a court found just the opposite: as an ISP, it was protected from liability for providing "transitory digital network connections" to allegedly infringing material, and not obliged to remove such links even if explicitly informed of their existence. Ironically, ISPs, who are arguably more directly in control, as it were, of third party material hosted on their servers, are granted more protection for "transitory" access to infringing material than search engines, whose very raison d'etre is to provide such links which are inherently ephemeral, and hence transitory, by nature, as they are the result of specific queries, and do not exist on a permanenty accessible single page.
This basic contradiction within the DMCA puts the onus on search engines to maintain by hand the results of their automated search process, and respond to any and all DMCA complaints, regardless of the location or even continued existence of the page to which the link directs the user.
It's clear that this loophole presents rapacious copyright owners with a new tool with which to combat any and all use of their material, but as seen in the case of xenu.net, it can also be used as an alternative to launching a suit by copyright owners whose goal is not the protection of their property, but the silencing of critics.
Google's DMCA disclaimer page [google.com] says " Please note that you will be liable for damages (including costs and attorneys' fees) if you materially misrepresent that a product or activity is infringing your copyrights." Is Google prepared to sue the Church of Scientology? After all, misrepresention is most certainly what has occured, and only after Google suffered a major league PR asswhomping did they, upon further reflection, decide that the home page was not a copyright violation.
So while Scientology lost the major battle (their intention was and has been for some time the removal of all critical content from Google, and especially xenu.net from the top ten), they still managed to win lots of minor skirmishes - forcing the xenu.net site author to respond to dozens of specific complaints, nearly all of them barratrous (which I believe I can opine, being familar with the specific content on those pages, each of which adheres to the bounds of fair use). And because Scientology's newfound weapon found limited success, we can be sure we're going to see it again and again. This is far fom over and unless Google takes a stand, they will be abused badly.
The fact about scientology (Score:4, Interesting)
I encourage everyone to read the Clambake Site and the linked documents, and i would reccomend the books linked from it - Particularly the following
A piece of blus sky - subject of a massive lawsuit - the inside story of the church written by a former scienologist himself.
L Ron Hubbard - Messiah or madman - learn the truth about the nutcase named ron
Theres many more and i encourage you to read them.
This is a church that robs its clients, asttempted to take over the british mental health system, pretty much took over the town of Clearwater, performs feudal punishments for transgressions,may have been involved in a number of murders, were caught systematically spying on the US govt including breaking into the IRS and copying court documents and much more. (read about the Sea Org, their very own navy)
they dont play games and they harrass people who go against them in ways you cannot even imagine and they have billions of dollars in money and assetts.
Read about them and learn the truth but be very carefull, these guys are very serious customers.
Re:Nope (Score:4, Interesting)
Some religion hey?
Parent
How to Fight Scientology (Score:5, Interesting)
Slashdot participants are in a unique position here to turn the tables on the cult by adding a link to http://www.xenu.net [xenu.net] to all the websites we run. If enough of us link to www.xenu.net, we can make it the #1 resource for information about Scientology! (remember that Google's cache uses the number of referring websites to determine the ranking of listings in search results).
Alex Berkman
No they don't. (Score:5, Informative)
Scientology = a bunch of wackos (Score:5, Informative)
A good first step but... (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm doing my part. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:ph33r? (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, pretty accurate test.
If you walk in to enquire...
...you failed!
graspee
Parent
Re:Why read /. (Score:4, Insightful)
I can't really tell the difference between Scientology and Christianity
I ordinarily wouldn't respond to a post so wildly divergent from topic, but I consider the insightful mod you received as my personal go ahead on the part of /. moderators to engage you in this discussion.
The question between us is, what do I understand that you do not, what are you capable of understanding, and what are you willing to understand. The very question betrays an incredible ignorance with regard to religious matters whose sheer scope defies response. The only way I could compare it would be to hold modern atheists responsible for the Stalinist purges or Pol Pot's killing fields because they were atheist regimes. One given to applying blame for evil in the context of stereotype might well make such accusations.
This brings us to the matter of what I think you are capable of understanding. Since I believe the condition to which I referred above is a matter of decision on your part rather than reason, I think you could understand much if you chose to acknowledge that others have as much right as you to decide what is important to them.
As for what you are willing to understand, I fear that you, like all bigots, have chosen not to understand for fear of facing what that understanding might mean. I certainly invite you to human fellowship and tolerance, but I don't expect it.
Parent
Re:Contact info for scientology lawer (Score:5, Informative)
These guys play for keeps - read the xenu.net site, you dont provoke them for fun as they WILL destroy your reputation and your life, they think nothing of spreading false stories about people being criminals and or even child molesters.
They are a dangerous group of people and you should carefully investigate them before taking them on this is not an example of MS suing someone or a hacker being charged - this is a group who broke into the IRS and copied files, who have been accused of murder, false imprisonment and brainwashing, have been banned as illegal in a number of countries.
SO- a warning to the
They have some very educated and technically skilled people so be carefull and make sure ANYTHING you do or say against them is done anonymously.
And i can speak from experience,i lost an ISP account for posting certain comments to newsgroups about them and a really nice cease and desist letter. I have moved 5 times and i still get mail from them, i dont know how they do it but they have to have sources inside australia post to get it (im an aussie) and that means they can track you - im sure they do in the US.
I dont recommend the experience and everything i do know is thru anonymous sources.
You have been warned -dont mess with them.
Parent