Automated DMCA Takedown Notices Request Censorship of Legitimate Sites 192
Techmeology writes "Microsoft has sent automated DMCA notices to Google demanding the removal of several legitimate URLs from its search results that Microsoft claims were facilitating the distribution of illegal copies of Windows 8, including links to BBC news articles, Wikipedia pages, U.S. government websites, and even Bing! The erroneous DMCA notices are being sent automatically by rights holders, who are increasingly using such techniques."
Noticed this earlier today (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Perjury charges forthcoming? (Score:4, Interesting)
Wouldn't they? Doesn't someone still have to sign their name to it?
When brought up in the past they were not real DMCA notices, its just everyone had an "understanding".
I did my part and emailed my Senator (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Bad law is bad (Score:5, Interesting)
If you wrongly claim to own the copyright or be the agent of someone who does, there is a penalty under the perjury clause. If you wrongly claim you are the person who the notice was targeting or an agent of them, the same exists.
However, the validity of the take down notice as in the actual content is what you claim or that the use of it was an actual violation of the copyright does not carry an explicit penalty under the DMCA. This is because the DMCA is not really about the claims, copyright, or fair use, but a way for network and service providers to act on the claims without becoming liable themselves.
Practically speaking, anyone who is the victim of a fraudulent claim can sue the person who made the claim for damages. If they pretend they are in collusion with the service provider and it wasn't a DMCA take , then the service or network provider that disabled access to the service is not shielded from liability either. Unfortunately, often the damages are far less then the cost of suing or the resources someone might have available to push the buttons.
If the rules were balanced (Score:2, Interesting)
Microsoft would now face a $200 trillion fine for violating the law (When you scale up from what single persons are liable for under this law, to the income and wealth of microsoft)
If the law was balanced, I would imagine we would get fewer cases of false notices, as it is now, all they get is a bit of bad press, it is probably not even mentioned in the press for non-nerds and there so why should they not send out takedown notices for everything?
Re:Knock out the spammers (Score:4, Interesting)
They seem to be making claims to XBox games they don't publish as well, e.g.,
Copyright claim #3 SpecOps The Line (XBox360)
Published by 2K Games, developed by Yaegar Development,
Risen 2 Dark Waters (XBOX360)
Published by Deep Silver, developed by Piranha Bytes
Mass Effect 3
Published by EA Games, developed by Bioware
Max Payne 3
Published by Rockstar/Take Two developed by Rockstar
Other games mentioned are Rock Band, Brave, Ice Age 4 Continental Drift, Dead Island Game Of The Year Edition, Men In Black Alien Crisis, Just Dance Greatest Hits, Game of Thrones, Inversion, Dirt Showdown
None of these are Microsoft Games. Microsoft does not develop or publish these games. They *are* playable on a system Microsoft develops - the XBox360 - and possibly even uses to distribute the product through their XBox Live marketplace. Nonetheless, that gives them no right to claim they have authorization to send these DMCA notices, anymore than GameStop has that right. The publisher or developer needs to send the notice, not the distributor.
So just because your software runs on a Microsoft platform, they can claim copyright on it? Extend and embrace indeed!
Re:Keep it rolling boys (Score:5, Interesting)
Perhaps you haven't put the line through all the dots yet... that is the plan. Crush the internet as we know it, and replace it with something that resembles phone service. You pay for their service, they give you what they feel like, you pay what they demand, and you shut your mouth and enjoy it, or do without. This wild anything goes hippy-fest, communist plot that we currently call the internet is an unending pain in their collective sides and they must do anything they can to kill it, so when you say you hope it dies, you're in fact serving their interest.
It is time for Americans, to build a completely free and unregulated internet. One not subject to government control, and for the luv-o-jebus utterly inaccessible to large corporate interests. It should be free, open and paid for by donations from users who want to circumvent the increasingly pay-per-screw models being inflicted on the users by the monolithic service providers of the world. Most important, it should route around existing systems of control and manipulation. There is no sane argument against having a free and unrestricted system of communications among people. We've been fed lies and hyperbole by people whose interest is that we keep the masses in line. This isn't about stopping a handful of predators, and it never has been. You don't destroy a $50,000 vehicle to get at a 10 cent fuse. Our entire society has become a means by which wealthy powers have concentrated wealth and power to give them control and authority over the groveling masses. Its about time for the masses to tell the powers to kiss their collective asses, we'll take care of ourselves thanks.