Google Receives Takedown Request Every 8 Milliseconds

Via TorrentFreak comes news that Google is now being asked to remove one million links per day (or an average of one takedown notice every 8ms). In 2008, they received one takedown request approximately every six days. From the article: The massive surge in removal requests is not without controversy. It’s been reported that some notices reference pages that contain no copyrighted material, due to mistakes or abuse, but are deleted nonetheless. Google has a pretty good track record of catching these errors, but since manual review of all links is unachievable, some URLs are removed in error. ... The issue has also piqued the interest of U.S. lawmakers. Earlier this year the House Judiciary Subcommittee had a hearing on the DMCA takedown issue, and both copyright holders, Internet service providers, and other parties are examining what they can do to optimize the process. In the meantime, the number of removal requests is expected to rise and rise, with 10 million links per week being the next milestone.

Faulty logic

[s.petry]

Your statement is based on an absolutely false assumption. You really don't have to look hard to find that most requests have nothing to do with illegal content. The overwhelming majority of the take down requests are for censorship purposes.

Why is this Google's problem?

[Last_Available_Usern]

They aren't hosting the content, they're merely making pointers to it. Isn't this an issue that should be handled by the company hosting/managing the web content? I'm surprised Google is getting involved in this at all and it makes me wonder what their motivations for doing so are, given the obvious administrative burden this is imposing.

Time For Cynicism

[organgtool]

The rightsholders have claimed copyright on birdsong, a public transmission of the space shuttle launch, and many other claims of complete nonsense, proving that their algorithms are way too aggressive in flagging videos and that they can't even be bothered to review the "infringing" material before issuing a takedown notice. So who wants to bet that the legislative resolution to this issue has nothing to do with harsher penalties for fraudulent requests and everything to do with harsher penalties for "pirates" who happened to have a radio or television playing in the background when they caught something unusual on video?

Re:This is the future Republicans want for all of

[Andrio]

This mentality will destroy the country. Stop turning things into Republicans vs Democrats. Truth is they both serve the same corporate masters.

Under Obama, for example, a former Monsanto Exec became the head of the FDA. A former telecom lobbyist became the chairman of the FCC. I mean, what the fuck, right?

Basically, whether you vote Republican or Democrat, this kind of thing will go on. The two party system is just useful for distracting people, and getting them to vote in such a way where nothing will actually change.

Re:Faulty logic

[jratcliffe]

I'm also incredibly skeptical, unless s.petry includes defines fighting copyright infringement as censorship.