HBO Asks Google To Take Down "Infringing" VLC Media Player 364
another random user writes with an excerpt from TorrentFreak: "It's no secret that copyright holders are trying to take down as much pirated content as they can, but their targeting of open source software is something new. In an attempt to remove pirated copies of Game of Thrones from the Internet, HBO sent a DMCA takedown to Google, listing a copy of the popular media player VLC as a copyright infringement. An honest mistake, perhaps, but a worrying one. ... Usually these notices ask Google to get rid of links to pirate sites, but for some reason the cable network also wants Google to remove a link to the highly popular open source video player VLC. ... The same DMCA notice also lists various other links that don't appear to link to HBO content, including a lot of porn related material, Ben Harper's album Give Till It's Gone, Naruto, free Java applets and Prince of Persia 5."
I own the rights to the letter E on line (Score:5, Funny)
I own the rights to the letter E on line
So Google better take down all links with an E in them.
Re:I own the rights to the letter E on line (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
That's Googl.
Nah, if you read what he said, he only claims to own the upper case letter. We're safe to keep using the lower case 'e'. (unless someone else owns that, of course, but that would be silly, wouldn't it)
Re: I own the rights to the letter E on line (Score:2)
Microsoft owns lowercase 'e'.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Penalties (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
There are penalties in the law, it's just that AFAIK nobody has ever convinced the government that a particular abuse was severe enough to implement them (yeah, it's a government for and by the corporations, why bother pretending otherwise)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Penalties (Score:4, Informative)
No and they're not claiming they do either.
They're claiming that they own the copyright on Game of Thrones (true) and that a copy of VLC is Game of Thrones (false).
The latter claim isn't made under penalty of perjury, only the former.
Welcome to reason ERROVERFLOW why the DMCA is a horrible law and should be erased from existence.
Re:Penalties (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Penalties (Score:5, Informative)
They aren't. The perjury clause only guards the representation claim, where the DMCA notice is sent by a lawyer. It does not guard the actual copyright claim, which is made "in good faith".
Re: (Score:2)
Not to the "rich" but to the powerful. Google's Larry and Sergy are rich. Oracle's Ellison is rich. Microsoft's Gates and Allen are rich. Jobs was rich.
But they're not the powerful. Government contractors, in particular defense contractors like Cheney's Haliburton's friends are powerful. People in the oil industry are powerful. People in the entertainment industry are powerful. The people running the banks, in particular the entertainment banks, are all-powerful.
There's a difference, and it's an important d
Re: (Score:2)
There are and rather severe ones.
Re: (Score:3)
There are and rather severe ones.
Yes, but HBO is a corporation. Probably one with lobbyists too, so justice applies differently.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. Not enforced is a totally different problem. Just imagine treating this like they would a chop shop....
The individuals at HBO entered into a conspiracy to not engage in proper do diligence before making fraudulent DMCA claims. That was part of HBO's structure and as such the following penalties shall be applied institutionally ______________. Individually the following individuals are to be convicted of misdemeanor fraud ...
One can only dream.
Re: (Score:2)
The individuals at HBO entered into a conspiracy to not engage in proper do diligence before making fraudulent DMCA claims. That was part of HBO's structure and as such the following penalties shall be applied institutionally ______________. Individually the following individuals are to be convicted of misdemeanor fraud ...
do diligence?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Yes you have to have good reason to believe you own property before claiming you own it. HBO didn't. They really didn't check the list point by point at all.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What do you mean? Absolutely nothing has actually happened, you can still use Google to get to VLC.
Why don't they just ask to take down the internet? (Score:5, Insightful)
Unless there is punishment for these types of blanket requests copyright holders will continue to abuse the DMCA takedown process.
Re: (Score:3)
Why don't they just ask to take down the internet?
Un-possible. Adult entertainment industry will recreate it back.
Re: (Score:3)
I've been surfing porn for more than a decade now, and I have yet to actually ever buy anything.
My guess? For enough many it's more about the "intensity" (can't call it quality) rather than the easiness to find "appetizers".
Re: (Score:2)
Easy solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Each link to material they do not own 100'000 USD to the target of the takedown notice and the same to the actual copyright holder. Alternatively, 30 days in jail for the executive in charge.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Each link to material they do not own 100'000 USD to the target of the takedown notice and the same to the actual copyright holder. Alternatively, 30 days in jail for the executive in charge.
I'd be OK with that except that there is a URL for "Freddy Got Fingered" in there and I sure as hell don't want to encourage the copyright holder of that gem with $100,000 in free money...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
That movie was a masturpiece!!!
FTFY.
Re: (Score:3)
Each link to material they do not own 100'000 USD to the target of the takedown notice and the same to the actual copyright holder. Alternatively, 30 days in jail for the executive in charge.
I don't have reason to like the dtecnet [torrentfreak.com] much, by my taste their executives can go to jail for longer.
(quote from the linked FA):
It is worth noting that the DMCA notice in question was sent by DtectNet. This is the anti-piracy division of MarkMonitor, the same company that is also responsible for tracking down BitTorrent pirates as part of the upcoming six-strikes anti-piracy scheme.
Google vs HBO? Not even close (Score:5, Insightful)
Dear HBO,
GFY.
Love,
the Whole Internet
Re:Google vs HBO? Not even close (Score:5, Informative)
I certainly am going to be modded down, but it is about time I explained that "GFY" stands for "Go Fuck Yourself".
Always with love from the Whole Internet.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Thanks, I read it as Good For You, and was having trouble making sense of the post.
It is not VLC they are attacking directly (Score:5, Insightful)
So the VLC listing had another area that had other listings or popular links and because it had the name they listed it.
There needs to be fines for false DMCA notices like this. They do not own the release name itself.
Re: (Score:2)
There needs to be fines for false DMCA notices like this.
By saying this, you are tacitly defending censorship and the worst kind of monopolies: on ideas. There shouldn't be a legal way to censor the art on the Internet in the first place!
Re:It is not VLC they are attacking directly (Score:5, Insightful)
Google's reply should be:
"We have ascertained that many of the URLs you provide do not in fact contain or link to your copyrighted content. It is apparent that you have not verified the URLs to be infringing under the provisions of the DMCA, and therefore cannot honor your request."
They should do this anytime even a single URL fails to link to infringing content in this way. Maybe after enough tries IP holders will get their act together. Maybe not.
Personally, I don't support piracy, and I do support IP in principle - but copyright is far too long (I think anything over approximately one generation is excessive), and nonsense like this has to stop. I'm glad the DMCA grants safe harbor, but there need to be penalties for companies that abuse the system. Perhaps losing the IP is too severe, but losing the ability to file DMCA takedowns for a period of time might be appropriate.
What would happen (Score:3)
If I incorporated, and then had my "company" start spewing out DMCA notices algorithmically to every site that responded to a curl? "Does a.com exist? No. Does b.com exist? No... Does aa.com exist? Yes? Ok, they have infringing content, take them down please. Does ab.com exist?"
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Probably something like this....
if [ $CAMPAIGN_CONTRIBUTOR ]; then
$PROFIT
else
$JAIL
fi
Isn't there a "I swear it's all true" requirement? (Score:2)
And isn't there a punishment for lying on DMCA? Someone should enforce that.
Re: (Score:3)
The "I Swear It's All True" requirement is to say that you are authorized by the copyright holder to send out the notice, not that the item actually infringes.
Re: (Score:3)
Which covers false DMCA requests where they flag content that really belongs to someone else - such a VLC. You're right though that this perjury thing does nothing to solve the problem of DMCAs being sent for content that fits in to the "fair use" bucket.
Re:Isn't there a "I swear it's all true" requireme (Score:5, Insightful)
The "I Swear It's All True" requirement is to say that you are authorized by the copyright holder to send out the notice, not that the item actually infringes.
Which is all dandy until you demand the takedown of something that any lawyer doing the most basic due diligence would know was not theirs. Which has happened countless times, some of them reported on /.
That's the kind of shit that should lead to the lawyer being disciplined. But don't. And if you want to look for things that are seriously screwed up with the USA today, you can start there since it's already on the table.
Re: (Score:2)
It shouldn't lead to the lawyer being disciplined. It should lead to the company being disciplined. HBO should be responsible for the content of the list.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think lawyers should be held responsible to know what property HBO owns.
Sorry. I think the lawyer is fine.
Re: (Score:2)
Falsely claiming to have rights to something you don't, including copyright, is fraud. When HBO claimed to have rights to VLC they either were mistaken or fraudulent. If there is some other reason some DA were pissed at HBO this creates an opening.
what a ridiculous waste of time (Score:3)
arent these media companies smart enough to realize that piratebay doesnt have any control whatsoever of the names of the torrents? i mean really...if TPB took down all the Game of Throne links that HBO wanted them to, within 5 minutes they would all reappear with slightly different names and different links.
and yes, i know already the answer is no they aren't.
Re: (Score:3)
TPB correctly doesn't respond to DMCA requests because they're not hosting the content in question. These requests are directed at Google. So if you search "game of thrones season 1 HD torrent" on Google you won't get a link to a magnet link that will lead to a torrent of that exact thing on TPB. But if you go to thepiratebay.sx or whatever their latest TLD is and search for that you'll get it right away.
Re: (Score:2)
yes of course you are correct but who the hell searches google for torrents?
Re: (Score:2)
yes of course you are correct but who the hell searches google for torrents?
To be fair, Google often does a better job of filtering torrent matches to your search terms than your everyday garden variety torrent search site.
Re: (Score:2)
TPB doesn't respond to DMCA requests because they aren't under US jurisdiction and hence the DMCA doesn't apply.
Time to have fun (Score:2)
Time to do what they ask (Score:5, Insightful)
I seen from TFA that HBO at one point requested their own website to be removed. If I was Google I'd be paying extra special attention to requests for Mega Corp A to take down Mega Corp B's website (or even better their own), and react quickly. Of course I might be a little slower in dealing with the subsequent undo requests whilst watching the ensuing entertainment.
Naruto link is to a search engine (Score:2)
Even now (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd still pay HBO a reasonable amount of money to watch their shows online. But I can't. First, I have to buy cable TV ($60/mo), then I also have to buy a special package that includes HBO ($30/mo), and then I still have to pay extra for HBOGO. So over $100/mo to watch a couple good shows. Yeah, I'll just keep using torrents. Even though it's still a huge ripoff compared to other services like Netflix and Hulu, I'd pay $10-15 per month just for HBO online. Let me know when you're serious about wanting my money, HBO.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Even now (Score:5, Funny)
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones
Google should charge for bad/fake DMCA notices (Score:2)
If i was Google, I'd start charging companies for fake DMCA notices. $100k per notice that isn't actually pointing to an infringing file that the DMCA filer doesn't own the copyright to.
I bet these "mistakes" would stop happening pretty quick.
Fair is fair (Score:2)
We need to be just as understanding and willing to give the benefit of the doubt as HBO is when someone inadvertently shares their IP against copyright.
That is, not at all.
No seeds for the torrent, so why issue a takedown? (Score:3)
Why issue a takedown for a torrent with no seeds?
Guess I won't be buying Season Three of GoT (Score:3)
I enjoy Game of Thrones, but find very little other content on television that appeals to me. I decline to pay my local cable monopoly $300+ for one show, so buying the DVDs is my only way of making a contribution to the show's bottom line.
I use VLC for pretty much everything that isn't Hulu or Netflix. I guess the folks at VideoLAN can put that extra $40 to better use anyway.
Re:looks like copy paste fail (Score:5, Insightful)
Looks like they just copied the VLC link by accident. There was only one link there(besides its probably a virus and not a real VLC copy anyways). Yawn.
When it comes to these large media companies you should never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by malice.
Re:looks like copy paste fail (Score:4, Insightful)
Looks like they just copied the VLC link by accident. There was only one link there(besides its probably a virus and not a real VLC copy anyways). Yawn.
When it comes to these large media companies you should never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by malice.
And don't attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by "better return to stockholders".
Re: (Score:2)
Re:looks like copy paste fail (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, it might not be malice, but I'm sure we can all agree it's evil, i.e. harming others (e.g. takedown notices) to benefit oneself (e.g. stockholders).
Never made a judgment call on if it was good or not. Just that it was not Malice.
Re:looks like copy paste fail (Score:4, Insightful)
There's generally a 4-way tradeoff in any corporate decision between what benefits management, stockholders, employees, and consumers. It's usually the case that favoring consumers does the most net economic good (translate that to moral good however you desire).
Everything you do harms some others. You can argue that the RIAA takedown notices are evil because they restrict fundamental freedoms, or because they hurt consumers more than they help stockholders or artists, but you'd need to show that.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:looks like copy paste fail (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:looks like copy paste fail (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
I had to look up the definition of malice, but you're right.
I have never seen this type of internet banter. I have no idea now how to respond. You sir win.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Looks like they just copied the VLC link by accident. There was only one link there(besides its probably a virus and not a real VLC copy anyways). Yawn.
When it comes to these large media companies you should never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by malice.
IIRC there were safeguards planned against wrongful DMCA takedown notices. There were actual fines attached to them. What happened to those?
It is a no-brainer to attribute this to corporate stupidity. But there is such a thing as due dilligence. And if HBO arms the lawyerpult for an extended siege they could easily bring down a private citizen. Due diligence is expected of us in all things and we do get thrown into prison for honest mistakes.
Our access to the law is not equal anymore since it is hidden be
Re:looks like copy paste fail (Score:5, Insightful)
Pay attention to the bottom of the takedown request:
The information in all notifications submitted through the Program will be accurate, and I swear, under penalty of perjury, that with respect to those notifications, I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
Fuck that "it was an accident" argument, and prosecute them for perjury.
three strikes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:three strikes (Score:5, Interesting)
No the three strikes rule should be you lose your IP to the public domain. If you cannot be trusted to not claim ownership of other peoples property, you should lose your right to claim copyright at all.
We take a felons right to vote (without a doubt a more important right) so why can't we take away their copy right.
Re: (Score:3)
No the three strikes rule should be you lose your IP to the public domain. If you cannot be trusted to not claim ownership of other peoples property, you should lose your right to claim copyright at all.
We take a felons right to vote (without a doubt a more important right) so why can't we take away their copy right.
Now there's an idea I can put my John Hancock on!
Re:three strikes (Score:4, Informative)
No the three strikes rule should be you lose your IP to the public domain. If you cannot be trusted to not claim ownership of other peoples property, you should lose your right to claim copyright at all.
We take a felons right to vote (without a doubt a more important right) so why can't we take away their copy right.
You can.
You just have to stop voting for the two major parties that support the current system.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually no, if my way was followed they would have the same people, secretaries and stationary but their IP would now be in the Public Domain. Thus no standing to sue.
Re:three strikes (Score:5, Informative)
A lot of states do not let felons vote, and it is a terrible thing. I don't see how one should be forced to pay taxes when they have no say in how the government is run.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_disenfranchisement [wikipedia.org]
Re:looks like copy paste fail (Score:5, Insightful)
> I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
See the claim:
Copyright claim #4:
Game of Thrones (Original TV Show)
Original work URL(s):
http://www.hbo.com/game-of-thrones/index.html [hbo.com]
Allegedly infringing URLs:
0. https://tpb.ipredator.se/torrent/8493409/Game_of_Thrones_S03E08_480p_HDTV_x264_-VYTO%5BP2PDL%5D [ipredator.se]
snip
407. http://www.torrentportal.com/details/6093721/VLC-Media-Player-2.0.7-Final-(32-64-bit)-Official.html [torrentportal.com]
They are alleging that VLC is violating their copyright on Game of Thrones. They own the copyright on Game of Thrones so they are in the clear. The fact that their allegation is completely off base doesn't matter.
This is actually a necessary and very unfortunate consequence of our copyright law... Because there aren't clear boundaries for what constitutes fair use and an original work, there is no ability to assert with any certainty that a given work is not derivative. Suppose that maybe that an error message in VLC contains a couple words from the show: it's legitimate (albeit in bad faith) to claim that VLC is now violating your copyright. So unfortunately without a revision to copyright law the only way to hold these people accountable for their 'mistakes' would require them to sue and have the court declare the work non-infringing. Maybe that would be better than the current, but it would undermine the whole point of takedown requests in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
* I don't have HBO nor do I watch any of their paywalled content. If Hodor isn't part of that canon, please don't send me an invite to Red Wedding II.
Re: (Score:3)
Or possibly that it is actually an episode of GoT just renamed VLC MEDIA PLAYER.exe
Re:looks like copy paste fail (Score:4, Funny)
Re:looks like copy paste fail (Score:4, Informative)
> They cannot possibly be the owner of the copyright to VLC, shitwit.
Yeah, and no one is claiming they otherwise. They are claiming that VLC* violates their copyright on Game of Thrones.
Do they own the copyright on Game of Thrones? Yes
Has VLC been proven in a court of law to be not infringing on one their exclusive rights to Game of Thrones? No
This is therefore a totally legitimate request under then letter of the law, slimy as it may be. Ignorance and name calling doesn't change that.
*If we are being particular, they are citing a torrent page, not VLC itself. Thus your comment is even more incorrect as even if your misunderstanding was accurate they'd be claiming copyright of a page on torrentportal, not VLC.
Further, while it's not really important for this discussion, I'd point out that that detail further muddies the waters: The torrent and/or the the description may actually contain some content from Game of Thrones. I've not checked and don't care to.
Re: (Score:3)
Which, of course, makes a world of difference from what is implied by the story's title and summary.
My guess is that they found a forum post linking to a bunch of episodes which also included a link to VLC (as a useful "use this to play them" by the post's author), and that got copy
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
"accident", yes, that's it. Because VLC matches the terms of an HBO show.
Except in reality, where it's not an accident but straight up incompetence, which also doesn't prevent people from finding the link. It makes it *easier*. Need to find out if a file may be legitimate? Well, if it's blocked there's probably better chance that it is. Not only that, but now you can just view the DMCA claim to find your link.
Re:VLC is illegal in the USA (Score:5, Interesting)
While it is not "infringing content", VLC player IS illegal in the USA. It is a digital lock-breaking device. Linux distrobutions which include DVD playback capabilities are also illegal.
This is not surprising to me, but it hardly matters because it's not like VLC will cease to ever be easily available.
Maybe my memory is faulty or not up-to-date, but VLC on Linux doesn't pay DVDs out of the box, does it? I seem to remember needing to specifically enable a non-default repository and explicitly install playback libraries for DRM'd DVDs before they would play.
Re:VLC is illegal in the USA (Score:4, Insightful)
Depends on the distro. I think recent versions of Ubuntu are set up like this, they have the "controversial" stuff in a separate repo.
Re:VLC is illegal in the USA (Score:5, Informative)
As you hint at, it's the libdvdcss capability that's the main problem under anti-circumvention provisions of the US DMCA.
You can get versions of VLC which only use FOSS and patent-unencumbered codecs. Debian used to (maybe still does, I haven't looked in a while) make this distinction pretty clear, the "main" packaged VLC was unencumbered, and you had to go outside the main package tree to get the other stuff.
So, in most practical installations, you're right, but it's not literally true that "VLC is illegal in the US."
Re: (Score:2)
It sure is! The copyright holders figured this out about a year ago.
In fact maybe this was an attempt to make DMCA takedown lists less useful, by filling them with unrelated stuff, no longer making them a handy directory of the goodies you're looking for.
Re:AHAHA, what? (Score:5, Funny)
VLC? Shitty!? You must be a mac user upset that it didn't have a minimalistic interface filled with silly skeumorphisms.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Annual prosecutions launched for DMCA related perjury is similar in number to prosecutions for regicide.
Re:Perjury. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Must've accidentally confused it with videos of themselves screwing us?
Sorry, them screwing us is a fetish well beyond [wikipedia.org] porn.
Re: (Score:2)
your right to submit takedowns is suspended for a month? These things are supposed to be carefully considered requests, not 'if we hit 7 out of 10, we're happy'...
Alternatively, some [torrentfreak.com] of the takedowns may be executed.
Re: (Score:2)
Alternately, those individuals could have patronized other content providers that are willing to provide entertainment on terms and at a price that is more agreeable. Rather than feeling entitled, that is.