TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Copyright Industry Calls For Broad Search Engine Censorship

At a behind-closed-doors meeting facilitated by the UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport, copyright holders have handed out a list of demands to Google, Bing and Yahoo. To curb the growing piracy problem, Hollywood and the major music labels want the search engines to de-list popular filesharing sites such as The Pirate Bay, and give higher ranking to authorized sites.

censoredIt’s no secret that the entertainment industries believe search engines are not delivering enough when it comes to protecting copyright works. Just last month, the RIAA and IFPI accused Google of massively profiting from piracy, while putting up barriers to make life difficult for rightsholders.

If the copyright industry had their way, Google and other search engines would no longer link to sites such as The Pirate Bay and isoHunt. In a detailed proposal handed out during a meeting with Google, Yahoo and Bing, various copyright holders made their demands clear.

The document, which describes a government-overlooked “Voluntary Code of Practice” for search engines, was not intended for public consumption but the Open Rights Group obtained it through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request.

In short, the rightsholders want the search engines to make substantial changes so that pirated content becomes harder to find, or is de-listed entirely. In addition, they want to boost the rankings of licensed content. Below are the three new measures they propose.

  • Assign lower rankings to sites that repeatedly make available unlicensed content in breach of copyright
  • Prioritize websites that obtain certification as a licensed site under a recognised scheme
  • Stop indexing websites that are subject to court orders while establishing suitable procedures to de-index substantially infringing sites

In the document rightsholders explain that they find it inexcusable that some websites – Pirate Bay and Isohunt in particular – are still indexed by all major search engines even though courts have ruled they facilitate copyright infringement.

Not surprisingly, there is no mention of the collateral damage that such a broad filter would bring with it – many artists and other legitimate individuals are known to use these websites to share their works.

The document further details how many of the top search results for music, movies and books currently link to pirated copies. In order to stop this, the rightsholders propose that Google and other search engines systematically assign a lower ranking to possibly infringing pages.

“We propose that in order to further protect consumers and to encourage responsible behaviour among websites, the extent of illegal content on a website should become a factor influencing the ranking of that website in search results returned to consumers,” they write.

This should be doable according to the rightsholders, as Google already influences its search results based on various other criteria, such as the lower rankings that are assigned to so-called content farms.

“Given that Google already de-ranks and de-lists sites that do not meet its own ‘quality guidelines’ or otherwise violate its policies, we do not believe that search engines would face significant legal exposure if they were to de-rank or de-list sites using an objective measure, based on their actions in response to legal DMCA complaints, in pursuit of the legitimate objective of preventing their service being used to facilitate copyright infringement,” they write.

Conversely, it’s argued that search engines should also boost the ranking of legitimate sites for certain ‘relevant’ searches. A list of relevant terms to match to these relevant searches should be provided by pro-copyright groups. In the proposal, the rightsholders give the following example in the case of music files.

“We would propose that prioritisation be enabled for searches that contain any of the following key search terms: “mp3″, “flac”, “wma”, “aac”, “torrent”, “download”, “rip”, “stream” or “listen”, “free”, when combined with an artist name, song or album title contained on a list to be regularly updated and provided to a search engine by a recognised and properly mandated agency representing rights holders for a particular sector, such as BPI.”

Aside from these new proposals, the document also calls on the search engines to improve the censorship measures already in place, such as Google’s keyword filter for their “instant” and “autocomplete” services.

Although the proposal from the rightsholders is not a direct threat as it is a long way from being accepted, it clearly shows that rightsholders see censorship as the way forward. The search engines on the other hand were not impressed and are expected to supply a proposal of their own in a future meeting. Again behind closed doors.

The proposals

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • Hateorade

    you can buy hardcopies of bootlegs in the USA, lets remove all references to them from all maps, atlases and history books that are printed from here on out

    • http://twitter.com/MAFIAAFire MAFIAAFire

      Love the idea…but I don’t think everyone will have your dedication :)

      Disturbing article:
      Other than censorship they want Google (and other search engines) to help them directly in getting more sales when someone adds “bittorrent” to their search keywords?

      Un—-ingbelievable.

      • Tixati User

        They are getting crazier and crazier. I’ve already got my client of choice, Tixati, so I wont be searching for a new one, but this is still bulls**t. I fear that one day I will type in http://www.tixati.com and I wont be able to go there.

        • Fagman

          What is it with all the Tixati comment spam – does anyone really use this client?

        • Guest

          Nah Tixati’s owner have been paying guys to spam in all popular blogs and forums.

      • EASY

        When is torrent freak gonna be censored?? fucking parasites, i live eat and breed MAFFIAfire!! and to the rest make a donation to MAFFIAfire!!! protect our internet!! not spamming, just support the.orgs that keep our internet free of j3w parasites!!!

        • Guest

          You are the definition of a suck up. Use their plugin if you have to but stop hanging on to MAFIAAFire’s dick for Pete’s sake.

      • Angry Boid

        Do not flag for review please. Last time I checked this used to be the internet.

      • EASY

        Hey well said MAFFIAFire, These boners in hollywood should ddosed all the way back to the jurassic period where they belong, what’s next ban vpn’s? I don’t see any one bitching to m$ or apple for that matter.

    • TorrentFreakyIsaCensor

      FREE HANA BESHARA!
      FREE BRADLEY MANING
      FREE KIM DOTCOM

      • BooBooPhattyPhuck

        FREE Pr0n!

        People always forget the important shit…

        By the way, what’s Hanna-Barbera doing on the beach with MegaFatty?!
        http://torrentfreak.com/meganomics-the-future-of-follow-the-money-copyright-enforcement-120124/

      • Lazy Epoch

        Beshara is an arrogant slut
        Dotcom is a greedy scammer
        Bradley Manning is okay but good luck getting him out of his situation

        • Anonymous

          and ur a corporate dumfuck.

        • TorrentFreakyCensor

          What do you mean “Bradley Manning is OK”?

          Bradley Manning is an Hero!

          We are going to free them all!

      • Someone

        FREE DUKE CUNNINGHAM – BRIBING CONGRESS IS LEGAL NOW!

    • Mr. Putin

      Here’s a question; If they want to priorities their search results AND they have a shit load of money… why don’t they just STFU and pay for a pro-SEO company to get them #1 of the search engine -_-

      • OMGWTFBBQ

        Also this would break the whole way google works. Content and sites that are linked to the most are seen as most likely to be relevant or what the user is searching for. Showing again that they don’t care about how the internet works.

        What they would like to see is: Whatever the user looks for the result is 1000 links to sites owned by the MPAA. Like our Russian Prime Minister above said: Free SEO spots on all search engines, mandatory by law.

    • Mister-l

      that’s like what they have done is some schools, removing all sorts of books, specific to ethnic history. wow, they gave everyone all kinds of freedom, and now it appears that they decide they want to take away anything that suits their needs. from http://www.made-downloadsc.com

    • http://twitter.com/freakyvrk Varghese Paul

      visit http://freakhacks.blogspot.com… for hacking tips and http://www.gamesbasement.blogs… for latest game downloads.

  • IDIOCRACY

    Let us lobby for a law that makes it a capital offence (and 5 years in prison plus 1 billion dollar fine) for trying to censor the internet. Because otherwise this MAFIAA BS will really never stop and they will try to get more and more control on the internet.
    So vote your Pirate party! (at least DO something). hehe that will teach em.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/6JAYZHGHHRJXWRBPRQNK67MOCY Eric Nelson

      It won’t help. We need to get lobbying out of Washington. Period. We need to get rid of closed-door politics. The public should be able to see exactly where their taxes are going, exactly what opinions their representatives have, and exactly how the government reaches the conclusions it does.

      • Trolololo

        We need to get lobbying OUT of governments everywhere and into prisons. Full transparency will be the undoing of monopolies, which is nothing short of a good thing.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          Just one thing. Electoral reform. Forget the money aspect and dig deeper. The money out will still keep the parties in balance and move the bling outside of Washington.

          The electoral reform means we have new people in government to help start cleaning up the corruption.

      • Fellfromthesun

        Google and the tech/IT industry spent $120 million lobbying Washington in 2010 alone. Similar amounts in the 5 years prior. This is about what the RIAA and MPAA spend. So if you think Google is any less self-interested, you’re deluding yourself. How many of these companies voluntarily subject their sites to the Chinese government’s censorship so they can do business there?

        • Guest

          That’s okay, I don’t care about how much money they spend on lobbying – as long as an equal amount is spent by opposing lobbyists. MPAA/RIAA vs the Tech Giants is one of them. As long as there’s balance.

    • http://twitter.com/BeardedDalek Bearded Dalek

      Wait…how do you serve 5 years in prison after a capital offense? “Capital” means the penalty is death. It comes from the Latin word for “head”, and essentially was synonymous with decapitation when the term was first coined.

      Not that I don’t think it warrants such a punishment, I just wonder at the smell of leaving a decapitated censor laying around in prison for 5 years. o)>

      • IDIOCRACY

        That happens when you live in a western decadent society, there copyright infringment is punished with 25 years and a murderer walks free after 3 years because of good behaviour and softening circumstances or does not get convicted at all (O.J.). so the suposedly death sentence will be 5 years…. or something… bla bla…. hehe.

        • Acandellz4

          …murderer walks free after 3 years…

          Are you a retard or are you just bad at math?

        • JMZ

          He is a retard. Typical venom spewing internet loser.

    • guest

      These people are never gonna stop. I’m not usually for capital punishment but I just might have to make an exception for these assholes and hope for your law to pass IDIOCRACY. Maybe death will make them stop trying to control the internet.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=554203929 Kyle Ray Spier

      there already is one, censorship is considered limiting of free speech (1st amendment) and conspiring to limited or deny someones Constitutionally protected civil rights is a federal offence.

      http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/federal-statutes#section241

    • Guest
    • Ale

      Yes, this is actually a good idea. Beat those corporate thugs at their own game. Internet users have numbers on their side to make this happen – more people, and more dollars collectively. That scares corporations. They count on people not getting organized, or feeling like they can’t beat a corporation. Write legislation to ban secret legislation, internet censorship, and business’ hi-jacking of government. Ignore the naysayers who say this won’t work – they’re probably stealth plants. These thug corporations will not give up, they will keep coming at the internet and count on a war of attrition, i.e. exhausting opponents until they win. The stakes are getting too high, people will line up to support counter-legislation against these corporate thugs.

  • Anonymous

    This is pointless, there’s alternatives to Google, you know.

    DuckDuckGo – http://www.duckduckgo.com

    Yacy (p2p Uncentralized) – http://yacy.net/en/

    • Mr. Putin

      Yandex.ru/Yandex.com

      & yeah, duckduckgo is great, i love it… shame they don’t add more features and make the domain name a little shorter – they could easily combat google ^_^

    • http://www.twitter.com/echoman74 echoman

      startpage.com aswell ;)

      • Anonymous

        startpage = google search

        If something is censored by google…..you won’t find it using startpage

        You can do a google search from DDG with : !g

        Google image search: !i

        More > https://duckduckgo.com/bang.html

        • http://www.twitter.com/echoman74 echoman

          it’s not google they use google resources maybe you should do a search on startpage and actually read it does not copy your ip address. For your info.

        • http://www.twitter.com/echoman74 echoman

          Not sure where my reply to you went but to let you know startpage is under ixquick.com startpage only uses googles search without the worries of your personal info being shared it won’t track your ip and uses a free proxy service. this gives you a bit of info on how it works https://startpage.com/eng/protect-privacy.html

        • Guest

          Not sure where my reply to you went but to let you know startpage is under ixquick.com startpage only uses googles search without the worries of your personal info being shared it won’t track your ip and uses a free proxy service. this gives you a bit of info on how it works https://startpage.com/eng/protect-privacy.html

    • Anonymous

      if they get away with this shit on Google, Yahoo and Bing, dont you think they will go after the rest of the search engines. this is the start. get this ‘little bit’ passed, then go after a slightly bigger thing and so on and so on. SOPA has failed atm in the US so they are trying the same shit in the UK, just at a slower pace. the end result will be the same. they will have control, the people will be censored and dictated to!

      • Guest

        They can’t go afte YaCy because it’s p2p = descentralized.

    • guess

      ixquick.com a private an annonymous search engine

      • http://www.twitter.com/echoman74 echoman

        yeah that’s also startpage.com ;)

    • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

      Yacy is great, but I’m fairly certain the Duck uses google in compiling its searches, so you’re probably better using this as an alternative and SECURE search engine -
      https://www.ixquick.com/

  • Sense

    I feel that’s SOPA PIPA plan all along but just apply it step by step.

    The problem is, they are generalize that they all the music with the keyword mp3, wma, flac, etc.

    That’s not true, the filter will so much slow the search engine. Well, if they sensor too much, it will be underground uncensored search engine that will be more popular.

  • Anonymous

    Search engine censorship? Time to release the BOTS. Spiders: attack. Gopher get! Why rely on search engines? I think they rely on us too much.

  • Df

    Don’t know why they bother, it’s always been the same since taping of the radio in the 80s, nothing will change, it will just be a different search engine, more torrent sites etc
    You never see a poor pop star or moviestar unless they’re crap, as they all earn way to much money as it is.
    Save your money taking court action and live with it like all the years before.

    • Anonymous

      Huge generalization. Most artists are just trying to make the rent.

      • I’m too Artistic to work!

        Wow, that sounds like they’re in the same boat as everyone else. How horrible! :S

        If these artists had any brains they’d go out and get a job like everyone else. That’s how life works, if you’re s*** at something and can’t make a living out of it you do something else. How hard is that ffs!

        • Anonymous

          You’re making a broad assumption that someone’s work is sub-par. I’ve read hundreds of reviews on the internet, ripping on a movie I enjoyed. It’s an opinion. And you know what they say about opinions. You don’t get to make that choice for an artist. It’s the right of the artist to determine the method of distribution.

        • Aaa

          @Jones
          If they don’t make enough on their work to pay their rent, they obviously aren’t that good at what they do.

        • lulz

          Then they should be HAPPY to get torrented because it will incease their fanbase and likely cause more sales which lets them pay their rent. It’s not our fault they signed with some godawful label that teakes 95% of the money from all said sales.

          Get job, make music at home, put music online, put donate button next to music. Pay rent, make music… music gets popular enough (if it’s good) that people mass share it and it gets donated a lot… you quit job. This is how most anyone else does it, not many can make a living right off the bat off of the thing they love.

      • Sense

        Yeah well i understand and your right, maybe the internet have alternative to get the artists a little more richer.

        Maybe the entertainment industries is ripping them off. They try to said to us that piracy is ripping the artist. That i don’t believe!

        • Anonymous

          I completely agree that distribution companies and theaters are mindless middle men that profit from others hard work. A total block to communicating to the masses. The problem with online piracy, it doesn’t discern between the 2. Nor does it provide a way to present your case. Right now, there is no legal way to protect your work. There needs to be. And it shouldn’t stomp on the sharing nature of the internet.

        • Sense

          @JonesMatthew

          That’s kind the problem. You can’t protect your work. But can’t censor or control the entire internet too. That is what i fear. Isn’t not the industries that need to catch up the technology? If a company refuse to evolve, then is it them that put their employees at risk? The problem is, i don’t see many artists complains about piracy.

          I truly like the concept of megabox by exemple, they gived cash to the artists that upload their song. How much money they will made is a mystery for me. Right now artists are making not much cash with plastic cd’s. I don’t have the right % of what they are getting per cd’s but this is not as much that we can think of. They must be popular to have cash, because sponsors and shows can make them fast money. It’s the same that make a website rich. The popularity come with cash most of the time.

          In my engineer courses, i was told that the technology will replace many job. Jobs that will not exist anymore in 50 years. Robot is replacing human too. But in other perspective, job are created else where.

          Right, now i fear the us. So if i want to build a company, then i will think twice before getting a .com or place my server in the US. Their fight for privacy are hurting them.

          Well, this is just my opinion and maybe its time to rethink if the way that economy is working are the best options for humans and the planet. I think, the problem is well deep in the economy system than the copyright system.

          I’m just thinking something that bugging me: Why the vatican with so much cash don’t feed the poor? They are thinking that they speak to god and love each other and blabla, then they are so much cash and they want charities.. It’s kind of bugging me.

      • Guest

        Prove that piracy is an obstacle to making rent.

        Come on. Show me one single artist that couldn’t make rent due to piracy. Just one.

        Or, like the copyright industry, are you just lying your pants off about everything?

        P.S.
        Quit spamming “it’s the right of the artist to determine the method of distribution”. No matter how many times you repeat it, it’s still trumped by the free market’s right to determine the price of goods and services.

        • Anonymous

          I know that the director of our film, had to live in a dingy studio apartment for 3 years so he could pay down the debt from our film, that was pirated. I had trouble making rent for a long time during and after our production. And didn’t have enough money for medical insurance for a period of about 4 years…. You seem to be missing the point of why I’m on here. I AM ONE OF THE ARTIST THAT ONLINE PIRACY EFFECTS! I’VE SEEN IT FIRST HAND! Seriously, it’s the same lame argument. Same one sided justification that it’s cool to illegally download. Calling me a liar and that I have no point of view. I’ve been doing this for over 10 years now. If anyone knows about this issue, it’s me.

      • JaredLeeLoughner

        You impose your thoughts on how silly it is to judge ones work as sub-par, based on sales.
        Agreed.
        But let’s be clear.
        If ones work in the field of art cannot be judged by cold hard stats, (sales) then it MAY be judged by a survey of interest (pirates) and the numbers therein.
        Most artists are trying to make the rent. Inherently. And most artists have no presence on my trackers indexes, coincidentally.
        Good product needs no push.
        If YOU yourself are a struggling artist, complaining of pirates, show me ONE instance of it being shared online for free, against your will.
        I presume, because you are struggling, nobody shares your music, nor buys it.
        Same here.
        Most artists are just trying to pay the rent
        lulz

        • Anonymous

          Actually, Google has 2 pages of places to illegal download our film. Someone pirated our movie before we got a chance to get a distribution deal or announce our website for online sales. Actually, we were trying to self distribute, and look how it turned out. Thank you internet community, for revealing that you would getter a better deal out of traditional distribution channels than you would releasing it on the web. I know for a FACT it cost us a lot of money. I choose not to reveal it, so that a hacker who doesn’t like my opinion, doesn’t takes down my site. And if our movie wasn’t “Good Product” why did it get pirated so much?

      • Anonymous

        @lulz You cannot compare song production to movie production. You can produce a song on a single income. At the most, on average, a track won’t cost more than $1000. Making a feature length film, on average, just labor alone, is $250,000. It’s not even comparable. You can release your movie on a file sharing network, so that users will do what? Watch your next movie, that will never be made, because you didn’t make your money back on the first movie?

        1. I don’t think it’s cool to pirate a band’s music.

        2. Bands have other avenues to earn revenue. Concerts, t-shirts, hats, etc.

        3. There is this donation thing, called paying for it.

        4. They already have a job. Have been paying their dues for a long time. And deserve to be paid. If it’s being pirated, it has value.

        5. Online Piracy doesn’t discern between content that is controlled by a label and/or distribution company, or a group that is going DIY. In both cases, they put time and money into their content.

        You are reaching for reasons why it’s cool to continue to pirate someone’s work. Laying the blame at the feet of the content creators. Content that you so desperately need, that you steal it. “Yeah! We are giving it to The Man!” Well, not really. Mostly, you are just screwing over hard working people, chasing their dream.

        Explain to me again, why something that is being pirated has no value or worth? The fact that it’s being pirated proves it’s worth.

  • Anonymous

    I hope Google learned from their mistake of allowing China to use censorship. They better tell the UK to fuck off as well.

    • Danny

      Not the UK, just that idiot Ed Vaizey and his predecessor Mandy!

  • Anonymous

    stop region-locking your content then you would not have a piracy “problem”

    by now they have lost me as a customer because of all their bullying, but if their content was actually available for buying (without DRM or silly plastic discs) I would have pirated far less in the past.

    but now it is a matter of principle, a pirate’s life for me!

    • Ricardo

      Region-locking is just one of the problems.
      Overpriced products, draconian DRM, unskippable “don’t pirate my shit” messages on your legit movies, low quality, lack of wide availability, etc.
      And, of course, very crappy products.

      • Anonymous

        as long as pirated copies continue to remain the better product I really don’t see why I would stop

        piracy is a service issue

  • http://www.twitter.com/echoman74 echoman

    They just won’t quit till we make full boycotts to these industries.Then they’ll really have something to bitch about when people no longer want to do anything with any of these labels or studios. Keep it going mpaa and riaa. i know you guys dwell around torrentfreak.You’re a dying industry and trying anything you can to destroy the Internet well it won’t happen. GUARANTEED.

    • weez

      This is not the case. Current times “demands” that corporations and big labels simply must exists. My whole life is around that phenomenon, i can bitch’n all day long how corporations “killing” me, but my life of entertainment circulates around: i listen to music bought from corporation, my computer is softwared by corporation i like (Microsoft), i play on my computer and game is “corporated” for me too, my home theater plays media developed by big bucks in Hollywood… Without this things everything around me would be simply a little “emptier”. So, demands to stop piracy are not that much unreasonable, only a price for all that is simply to hard to standup. Censorship and oppression are of course not the way, but little minds can’t understand this until somethig disastrous happen. But as human civilization will evolve (i hope it will, even if now you can observe a huge regression in that matter) everything on “big picture” will be cheerful and colorful… And, sometimes, try to think about every aspect of “problem of piracy”, not only about yourself because you need others (sometimes corporations or big labels) to live a comfortable life… Think about that.

      • IDIOCRACY

        Instead of having a little emptier life, you might want to use this valuable not wasted time to play with your kids in the (currently) snow and in evening when the kids go sleep, you might want to go sleep a little earlier after pleasing your wife so your brain will rebuild itself better and you wife is happier the next day making your lunch when you have to get up early for work (growing food instead of creating useless machines that are there only because people are being bored . .tv playstation, food supplements and cancerous additives)…… just an idea…. hehe

        • weez

          Yep. And we would be still in bronze age for knees in fertilizer sleeping with animals. Thanks, but no thanks. So, rather after playing with my kids, and wife in that matter, get starboard and do some creative work to enrich with my creation world a little.

      • http://joshesforchange.wordpress.com/ Josh C

        Piracy only exists because the entertainment industry refuses to listen to their customers. The US is a free market (officially, we all know that’s a load of bull), which means that they have to give us something that we want before we hand over our money. If the industry actually put out a quality product that doesn’t turn people into a bunch of brainless sex machines (yes, I believe the music industry is trying to control us through subliminal messaging put in the music they release; the evidence has gotten pretty ridiculous as of late, so don’t ask how I know) and trying to control the control the internet (we all know SOPA/PIPA was just them trying to hedge out any kind of competition, because then we’d all want to spend our money on their trash /sarcasm), then maybe we’d buy their stuff.

        • weez

          It is all true, but this branch have other and too…

        • Fellfromthesun

          When 100,000 people download my album, and maybe 1,000 buy it, I think I have created something people want. Yet they still don’t seem to hand over any money, which means making the next album is gonna be a problem if the last one was a loss. There are plenty of ways for people to preview an album and decide whether they like it or not without ripping the thing entirely from a torrent site.

      • [Redacted]

        There’s plenty you can do to avoid giving money to big corporations:

        “i listen to music bought from corporation”
        Independent musicians.

        “my computer is softwared by corporation i like (Microsoft)”
        Linux, *BSD, other alternative OSs.

        “i play on my computer and game is “corporated” for me too”
        Indie game developers.

        “my home theater plays media developed by big bucks in Hollywood”
        Indie movie producers.

        • weez

          Maybe some of that will work, but not all. In my line of work i can not avoid commercial, or “corporate made” software, because in most cases Free replacements are in comparison just ridiculous (Vectorworks, almost all Adobe software, Microsoft Expressions Studio and most of proffesional grade soft for HQ audio and video editing). And i did not yet found precedence, Mass Effect 2 or Splinter Cell have no indie alternative. Also indie movie industry is underdeveloped yet. With bigger creation,more advanced and richer experience goes almost in all cases bigger money. I will not full myself, in capitalism, money rulez almost everywhere…

          Don’t get me wrong, i’m not devil’s advocate, just saying that, if there is something that i can use than i will do it, no matter whether it is free or paid software or media of any kind. I will be very happy when the day will come when the whole “of it all” will become common value. But people don’t think about “giving” but about “taking” – both pirates AND corporations. Difference is that one do not have such tools for defense (big bucks) and others (with big bucks) do. And That IS unfair…

      • http://Operation-DarkSky.askaboutit.com Needlez™

        Just thought I’d comment real quick on this. You do realize there are alternatives to corporations. For instance computer wise move to open source. Linux, it can play games and other stuff just as good as windows. Your home entertainment system. hook that laptop or desktop to the monitor and stream the movie. I live a comfortable life with using non- big corporate items. And most corporate owned objects I own have gone to crap faster then the stuff that came from little home shops. My printer HP crap, my toshiba laptop CRAP. my systems76 laptop = AWESOME. there’s differences for everyone and yes everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but saying piracy is wrong or illegal is just plain dumb. Its not wrong to copy a work if you aren’t profiting from that copy. If you made a copy of something I created and made it better I would thank you as long as you aren’t selling it or distributing it. Does that make sense? It’s like with FOSS it is FREE. simply because they want it to be, and guess what they make enough money to pay for it to be free by other forms.

  • Ghandi of the Internet

    They can do all they want. What will eventually happen is new breakaway versions of the internet will form. You can’t control networking you corporate monsters!

    • Ender Wiggin

      And you don’t see the break up and balkanization of the net as a problem?

  • http://profiles.google.com/pianogamer Knut Harald

    So basically, they are demanding free advertising from google… shameless

    • Anonymous

      I agree, Holywood wants free placement of search results. But I also think that *most* users would rather land on a legit site rather than The Pirate Bay (for example) because *most* users don’t understand torrents, etc. So, I’m surprised that Google et al. haven’t tried to incorporate some type of legit-or-not signals into their search algorithms. So, some of the suggestions by Holywood seem to have some merit just from the perspective if Google trying to provide slightly better results. Of course, whatever Google et al. do will not be enough to satisfy Holywood.

      • Danny

        Googles rankings are based on peoples searches and clicks (+ a load of other magic).

        If TPB is at the top its because most people search for it and click through to there. It is therefore what the user wants not what google is shoving down their throats. The industries need to grow up already and make a good alternative!

        I already use Spotify and I love Netflix now that I can get it!

        • Guest

          That is not at all how rankings are decided. The amount of clicks that a certain website gets from Google may be a tiny factor… but barely anything. Maybe like 1% impact if this site gets more than that site.

        • http://twitter.com/erikqj Erik Q.J.

          The most important factor for the ranking is how many other sites link to it.

    • http://twitter.com/erikqj Erik Q.J.

      Yes, that, and even more: They essentially want to dictate what should be possible to find, and what shouldn’t, right down to the smallest details. Banning sites, down-prioritizing, prioritizing, and exclusive position in searches. They want to take a chunk of the search engine business, dictate it, and make the search engines work for free, following their commands.

      I’ve been waiting for this. The service Google offers is part of what they’ve explicitly complained about with services they want legally banned. Just wait, for their next trick, they’ll try to go after the search engines with legislation or lawsuits.

      My waiting hasn’t been in trepidation, though. On the contrary, I’ve been looking forward to it. Finally, they’re going after entities with legal and financial muscles. As importantly, the search engines know that giving in will completely sink their credibility and infuriate their most frequent customers. And so the search engines will fight. And they’ll win, eventually.

      Not least, this will clarify the nature of the MAFIAA’s campaign to even the densest people: It’s censorship, pure and simple, and a fact that will now be impossible to conceal.

      This is great news!

  • foff

    First of all google would have to hire an army to help decide what to censor as there is no program that could do it. Then you would have the cat and mouse game piratebay gets censored so piratebay becomes privatebay which redirects to piratebay. No program could censor that it would take many fulltime people to do that.

    The biggest kicker besides obvious work arounds would be the decline in use of google. It everthing I was looking for became difficult to find on google then I would be forced to use an alternative.

    The silver lining to all this is that it could force an underground internet. It becomes harder to fight what you can’t see. So go ahead you mafiaa fity fity fity fucks try to censor the whole goddamn world and see where that gets you. We will always find a way so fuck you and your attempts at controlling the whole internet! You can’t stop file sharing ever!!!!!

    • Anonymous

      You’re absolutely right. Because of the fact that Google does business in the US (and is headquartered in the US), it may come down to the fact that Google will have no choice but to comply (whether they disagree with the legislation or not). If and when Google starts censoring their results, the internet will move onto the next non-censored search portal.

      If Google doesn’t fight this to the death, then this will really be their death.

  • Pingback: Search Engines Given Code Of Practice | WebProNews

  • Pingback: Copyright Industry Calls For Broad Search Engine Censorship | We R Pirates

  • Oomg

    lol at google and the others if they say yes for that they will stop being the top search site and revenue will go accordingly ! LMAO !

  • Nope

    GET FUCKED.

    Change your fucking business models and adapt you fucking draconian mother fuckers.

    • Anonymous

      What should this new business model be?

      • Guest

        They don’t even have to change their business model, since their current business model still works just fine.

        What the MAFIAA needs to do is stop lying through their teeth that piracy is killing the entertainment industry, and using this lie as a basis to play World Dictator.

        • Anonymous

          They aren’t lying. You are applying piracy stats on big business. Not smaller production companies. In essence it’s making the industry point of entry, to make a return on revenue, in the hundreds of millions. It hurts the small guy, regardless of CEO salaries. This ideology is ignoring the full picture.

        • [Redacted]

          @JonesMatthew:

          The large companies think they speak for the whole of the industry. Many of the smaller independent artists and companies agree that piracy is good for business.

        • Guest

          “They aren’t lying.”

          Oh, yeah. I’m sure there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation for why the industry claims that piracy is killing it, and yet it somehow keeps being spectacularly profitable and never gets around to dying. Ever. In over a decade of making these claims.

          Surely they can’t be *lying*.

          “It hurts the small guy”

          Proof. Right now.

          Right. Now.

          Because we have word right from the mouths of small indies that piracy is a great promotional tool, and that giving away their music for free boosts donations, concert attendance, and merchandise sales.

          Please explain this discrepency, oh wise and all knowing JonesMatthew.

      • [Redacted]

        Why should we come up with a new business model for them? They’re the ones earning hundreds of millions of dollars a year while complaining about losses from piracy.

        • Anonymous

          You are ignoring the small production companies that online piracy IS destroying.

        • Anonymous

          @JonesMatthew please give me a concrete example

          online piracy is destroying noone that doesn’t deserve to be destroyed (because their product was not worth buying in the first place)

        • [Redacted]

          @JonesMatthew: “You are ignoring the small production companies that online piracy IS destroying.”

          [Citation needed]

          And you’re ignoring the small companies and independent artists that say piracy has helped them increase their profits.

        • Anonymous

          Anonymous. “Online piracy is destroying noone that doesn’t deserve to be destroyed (because their product was not worth buying in the first place).”

          That is not your decision. You can decide not to buy it. You can decide to give it a bad review. It is illegal for you to steal it and distribute it to millions. And your opinion, is not above the law. Or above the rights of the artist who makes the final decision on how it’s distributed. If releasing free music helps musicians, that’s a good marketing ploy. Good for them. But, you can’t compare a song, which you can listen to many times over, to a movie that most people watch once. There are no concerts, or outside of rare cases t-shirts and hats. Once it’s watched, it’s over. A song costs maybe $20,000 to produce. High end. A movie, at a minimum $250,000. It’s not even comparable.

          And besides your argument just pushes artistic endeavor even further into the hands of corporations. Increasing the market entry price to hundreds of millions. The anti-SOPA talk is just as damaging to the principles they say they are protecting.

        • Anonymous

          @ Anonymous. If you say something is garbage and not worth money. Why pirate it? The act of pirating clearly denotes value. If it has value, you should pay a fair price for it.

        • Anonymous

          JonesMatthew
          it is only illegal because corporations say it is illegal, there is nothing morally wrong with sharing, indeed it is encouraged

          there have been some movies and tv-shows that got fanfunding, and they were quite comparable to big budget productions, so don’t tell me that when sharing is legal again all culture would cease to exist.

          I pirate far more than I could ever afford, most of it is not worth buying, but it is enough to entertain me. Sadly it does not air where I live and it is also not available in the various streaming offers because my region is seemingly not worthy. so I pirate, and there is no lost sale for the industry.

        • Guest

          “It is illegal for you to steal it and distribute it to millions. And your opinion, is not above the law.”

          But *your* opinion is above the law, I see. After all, the law says that piracy isn’t stealing. However, because JonesMatthew says it *is* stealing, that means the law is wrong.

          lol ego.

          “You are ignoring the small production companies that online piracy IS destroying”

          Evidence that small production companies are being destroyed by online piracy? No? You don’t have any?

        • Fellfromthesun

          “it is only illegal because corporations say it is illegal, there is nothing morally wrong with sharing.”

          Right. Let’s try that on: you TAKE something from people who created it and have offered it for sale, because they need to be compensated for costs and time and effort in order to be able to keep on creating this stuff. You “share” it with your friends, thereby denying the creator of the income he requires to make more of this thing you think is cool enough to “share” with other people. Now what exactly have you “shared” with the creator? Zero, my friend.

          Taking something without asking permission and not giving anything in return isn’t sharing, it’s leeching. Freetard.

      • Anonymous

        Here is an idea: Movie theaters sell subscriptions instead of tickets per show. They make most of their money off the concession stand anyway, so it’s in their interest to have repeat visitors. In return, subscribers get a discount on per movie cost, and can watch as many movies as they want. This model works very well for Netflix, and cable companies, no reason it should not work in theaters too.

        • Anonymous

          I think this is a good idea. You pay premium rates and you get a license to a digital copy of the film. Watch again if you want from home. Desktop, iPad, iPhone, etc.

  • Ultra

    Can Google and other search engines move out of the US? I wonder what concessions foreign governments would give to allow them to operate from their countries?

    • Anonymous

      If you were the company Google, the smartest thing for you to do would be to move away from the US and drop the “.com” as quickly as possible.

      At this point, why anyone would want to continue doing business in the US is really beyond me.

      After MegaUpload, it looks like US policy is to seize ALL of a “suspected” company/person’s assets, making it impossible for them to remain in business and/or defend themselves. Forget about innocent until proven guilty… a company who gets in the way of the US (guilty or innocent) will lose all of their assets and will be DEAD before ever setting foot in court.

  • http://falkvinge.net/ Rick Falkvinge

    They want to _legislate_ to fuck up other industries’ products?

    I wonder what they would say if somebody mandated that their products must be sabotaged like that. DVDs that wouldn’t play, games that wouldn’t run. How would they feel if somebody forced them to do that?

    Oh, wait…

  • http://twitter.com/winterboarder Adrian S

    We stopped SOPA and PIPA in the USA, but YOU in the EU just let them pass ACTA. So before bitching at the USA, look at yourselves, you whiny spineless heard of sheep. Where is your freedom now?

    • Anonymous

      Seriously dude? And you don’t know USA signed ACTA too?

    • http://twitter.com/JakobPedersen Jakob Pedersen

      USA signed ACTA as well.

    • Iris

      We did not pass it. The European Council only signed it. The European Parliament and the separate parliaments of the different countries still have to ratify it in the coming months. And we’re trying hard to protest ACTA right now!

      • Anonymous

        yes, there is still a real chance to stop ACTA
        I really don’t see the EU Parliament passing it, so far they have been pretty pro-freedom (in contrast to many of the national parliaments that have been bought and rolled over)

    • saynotoignorance

      First of all, you didn’t stop sopa /pipa millions of people from all over the world along with thousands of sites, not just American protested in various ways to stop this going through.

      Second, ”you whiny spineless heard of sheep. Where is your freedom now?” What are you talking about you ignorant fuck, Obama has signed this bill back in september already. This is another free speach censorship bill that was written by the USA. They’ve done a good job in getting this bill under the radar actually and i can’t help thinking that sopa/pipa where nothing but decoys to get people’s focus away from ACTA.

      SAY NO TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER!!!!!!!!!!

      WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      RON PAUL 2012

      Love from the UK

      • Anonymous

        if only Ron Paul wasn’t a Jesus Freak :(
        as it is I cannot see supporting him

        • Just the facts, ma’am

          “if only Ron Paul wasn’t a Jesus Freak :(
          as it is I cannot see supporting him”

          Because you’re a fucking moron – the man is FAR from “a Jesus Freak.” He may have some Christian beliefs but Libertarians are NOT bible thumpers. You’re thinking of Neo-con Republicans like Romney, Gingrich, Santorum and the rest of those war-mongering Israel-obsessed lunatics. Calling Dr. Ron Paul “a Jesus freak” is like calling Stalin a humanitarian. Bloody retard.

    • Shspvr
    • IDIOCRACY

      I guess your were not standing upfront when god gave us brains, did ye who’s the sheep here, did not even know what was happening.

    • [Redacted]

      We had no say in ACTA. It was all done in secret without input from the public.

    • Anonymous

      @Adrian S

      EU did pass ACTA, however America had a president that signed it (possibly under illegal circumstances) LAST OCTOBER without consulting with Congress.

      I am an American who wants to bitch ONLY at the American “Government”.

    • It’s a fit-up

      People like you remind me of Bush when he claimed that the French don’t have a word for entrepreneur.

    • It’s a fit-up

      The EU is putting it to a vote which is more than can be said for America, Obama claims it doesn’t need to be democratically passed, he said that he alone has the right to pass it as it’s an ‘executive decision. and you people let this happen?

      Whose the fucking sheep now retard.

    • Dumb Adrian

      Get your facts right before you post your shitty drivel. Something for your ignorant little brain to try and digest>>>

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jan/27/acta-protests-eu-states-sign-treaty

  • T6

    who are these rightholders? tell them to take there recommendations and shove it up there ass. stop trying to boss google and everyone else around

  • Pingback: Notrackingme | Proxy » Blog Archive » Copyright Industry Calls For Broad Search Engine Censorship

  • Xenobyte

    Most artists I know of have free exclusive remixes provided on their homepages, usually in mp3-format… So these offerings shouldn’t be indexed by Google etc. because the artists are bound to be on those lists, and both “free” and “mp3″ are involved as well?

    Stupid… That’s a direct hit to the right foot and the cannon ball is now heading for the left…

    • http://joshesforchange.wordpress.com/ Josh C

      We all know the MAFIAA doesn’t give a fuck about indie artists, and they even want to see us all go bye bye…

  • Citizen Shane

    So we’ll just use alternative search engines and google will end up becoming another excite/napster/digg. They’re becoming too large for their own good anyway.

    The old bats in government have to realize that the internet in it’s current form cannot be contained and they cannot effectively censor it without killing off their own sources of revenue/investments.

    They shut down napster, which led to kazaa taking over, they shut down kazaa, which led to edonkey taking over, they shut down,edonkey, which let to bittorrent taking over. Each time they go after these sites/programs, p2p becomes even bigger and even more decentralized.

    While they’re destroying legitimate businesses and censoring websites, millions of people like me are going to continue downloading movies and tv shows. It’s going to be game over for them when encryption is widely used.

    The only reason why I go to the movie theater is because my local independent theatre shows all movies for $6 until 5PM which I think is a reasonable price while the nearby regal cinema charges $9.50 early showing and $11.50 for evening.

    • IDIOCRACY

      “The only reason why I go to the movie theater is because my local independent theatre shows all movies for $6 until 5PM which I think is a reasonable price while the nearby regal cinema charges $9.50 early showing and $11.50 for evening”

      guess you are lucky, even with the normal price, here a show is 17,50 euro = about 21.52 dollar for a movie in the theater. Kid movies are 10 euro for the kids but it is obligatory for every 2 kid tickets 1 paying adult => with 3 kids = 65 euro’s = 79 something dollars…. f*ck them…. I can feed my whole family a week for that money.

      • Sense

        You can feed your family, have a popcorn, have a soda and download a great movie for the familly at the same price :)

    • Anonymous

      It will be a war of attrition. As is the war on car theft. Keep building it up, they’ll keep ripping it down. There needs to be a discussion on what is fair use and parody in the context of the internet. This isn’t a 1st Amendment issue. It’s copyright infringement. And online piracy reduces the quality of the entertainment, along with killing jobs. These are facts.

      On a side note, I completely agree that the distribution model and pricing needs to come down. New releases should be in the theaters and onDemand. $10 a ticket. $20 for onDemand in the first 2 months. $5 for the next 6 months. $1 to watch there after. With options to purchase a HD file at $5-$10. They should also experiment with providing an access code to a download file for anyone who purchases a high priced ticket in the theater.

      • Anonymous

        i WOULD download a car!

        but you are making the classic mistake of confusing copying with stealing, a clear sign of a copyright troll.

        online piracy greatly enhances the quality of my entertainment, because the companies that produce my entertainment don’t think i should be able to buy it online the same time as my friends in the US and they think i’d much rather have a crappy dubbed version than the original.

        piracy is also creating jobs, many VPNs or ISPs wouldn’t get so much business if it wasn’t for us freeloading pirates.

        • Anonymous

          Let’s not forget… Piracy also contributes to an increase in the purchase of computers (for downloading), hard drives (for storing all your downloaded stuff), and other hardware (like TV and projectors to show all your downloaded movies to friends on movie night). Piracy makes the economic world go ’round!

        • Anonymous

          Simultaneous releases would solve that issue. Along with realistic pricing for the masses. Jobs created by crimes, aren’t really jobs. You could count the Mafia as a real job under your definition. And lets be honest, ISP and VPN jobs aren’t going anywhere. Regardless of SOPA, PIPA, etc.

        • Anonymous

          Jobs created by crimes, aren’t really jobs.

          That’s really funny, dude, I guess that means that Congress and everyone else “working” for the government (including Obummer); everyone “working” on Wall Street; and all the thugs “working” for the MPAA/RIAA are technically, unemployed.

        • Anonymous

          When they finish designing it, you can download the car from here (plans for it, anyway):

          http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Open_Source_Car

          There are lots more open source machines being worked on.

        • Fellfromthesun

          “Piracy makes the economic world go ’round!”

          For everyone except the people being pirated, of course, which is why so many freetards and companies profiting from piracy (Google, AdSense) are going ballistic at any attempt to stop it.

      • [Redacted]

        “And online piracy reduces the quality of the entertainment”

        The quality of the entertainment is already at its lowest, what with the endless sequels and movies based on existing IPs.

        “And online piracy reduces the quality of the entertainment, along with killing jobs. These are facts.”

        [Citation needed]

      • Jmorse43508

        Online piracy killing the quality of entertainment?

        You’ve got that all wrong. The industry itself is killing the quality of entertainment by releasing crappy content that is often not even worth pirating, let alone buying.

        It’s a self inflicted wound.

        • Anonymous

          Hollywood dumbs things down to appeal to the masses, because it’s the only way they can guarantee a return. It becomes very risky to invest in a non-traditional script.

        • Anonymous

          If something is being pirated, it clearly has value. Why else would you pirate it? If it has value, you should pay a fair price for it.

        • Anonymous

          boredom

          and for me to be able to pay a fair price the industry would have to charge one ;)

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

          @JonesMatthew

          I’m not convinced that monetary value can be said to derive solely from demand, once the supply exceeds demand. With infinite supply, the price inevitably tends toward zero. But setting that aside, obviously there will be disagreement over what a “fair” price actually is. Just because you don’t know how to create and market something without spending gobs of money doesn’t mean your product is worth everything you spent, nor is it necessarily worth whatever markup you’ve imposed in order to sustain your exclusive career as a creator or exploiter thereof.

          You can tell me I need to pay $30 for a DVD of the 3rd Big Momma movie if I want to watch it, and you can tell me that a lot of people spent a lot of money to make that movie and they all need to be repaid so you can continue to bring us such “quality” entertainment, but I will still disagree as to whether that price is “fair”. You must acknowledge that the market has declared that movie to be worth much less than what you want to charge for it. In fact, for most people, it’s worthless, and they simply won’t pay for it. Whether that means they don’t deserve to watch it, then, is a matter of opinion; no sale was lost, so why does it matter?

      • Ugly American

        “And online piracy reduces the quality of the entertainment,”

        Then perhaps you’ll be kind enough to explain why Hollywood was producing garbage “entertainment” LONG BEFORE file-sharing became the norm. What was the reason before? Let me guess – video tapes and cassettes, right?

        “along with killing jobs”

        As in jobs of obsolete middlemen who refuse to adapt and embrace technology?

        I suppose those record profits in the last few years – during a terrible economy when others were / are struggling, mind you – “killed jobs”…? Spot the flaw in this theory? How do record profits = “less jobs?” What convoluted math is this?

        “These are facts.”

        Hardly – it’s all MAFIAA propaganda. There isn’t a single documented case which proves that file-sharing “kills jobs” or “reduces the quality of (so-called) entertainment.” On the contrary, both demand and profits have gone up consistently in the last few years – which demonstrates that the “piracy problem” is as fictional as the latest regurgitation from Hollywood’s “creative” minds. In other words, bullshit. The name of the game is greed and control, lad – THAT’S the real issue here, so don’t be fooled by the MAFIAA’s lies…

        • Anonymous

          If studios have less revenue to invest in future projects, they have to narrow their releases to cater to the masses. And are less likely to invest in non-traditional concepts. Example: The Matrix. I don’t think this concept is too big of a jump.

          And those articles that file sharers keep citing are as warped to prove their opinion as any of the MPAA reports. Without including any stats from smaller studios. Once again, you can’t compare profit margins of big studios to smaller studios.

          I also work with agencies that cater to these big studios. Studios are forced to slash budgets on websites and other promotional productions. Studios have to maintain profitability to live up to share holders expectations. ie People’s retirement savings. And to maintain that profit margin, they scale back on poster design, website design, dvd authoring, etc. I’ve also seen this first hand. It does effect jobs.

          If CEO pay pisses you off, you should be talking about corporate greed and tax rates. Not defending if it’s OK to illegally download Ghostbusters.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Don-Dilly/1624894683 Don Dilly

    Someone should remind these MAFIAA funded drones that film piracy has existed since the very start of the US film industry.

    In fact they started it. The very first films shown in the USA were pirated copies of EUROPEAN films.

    Georges Méliès ”A Trip to the Moon’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Trip_to_the_Moon
    being an excellent example.

    Ergo, The US film industry owes its very existence to piracy.

    • Anonymous

      Just because it’s been around for awhile, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be prosecuted. The real issue is declaring what is fair use and parody of copyrighted material in the context of the internet and social networks.

      • Anonymous

        you are right, that is the real issue.

        reduce the copyright period to 5-20 years and it would be much much fairer.

        • Anonymous

          Copyright limitations are worth discussing. I read recently that they were trying to take things back out of public domain. Not a fan of this.

        • Anonymous

          and you are defending those greedy bastards?

      • [Redacted]

        “Just because it’s been around for awhile, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be prosecuted.”

        No one’s saying it shouldn’t. Don Dilly was just trying to remind you MAFIAA shills that Hollywood wouldn’t be where it is today if it wasn’t for copyright infringement.

        “The real issue is declaring what is fair use and parody of copyrighted material in the context of the internet and social networks.”

        The media doesn’t matter. A parody cartoon is a parody cartoon, no matter if it’s in a newspaper or on a website.

      • Anonymous

        “Just because it’s been around for awhile, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be prosecuted.”

        It has been tried. The entertainment industry has been fighting the evolution of technology since the Xerox machine. Really way before that. The United Stated vs. Betamax 1984 was huge and lost by the industry. TIVO, blank DVD’s, the DVR, DVD recorders, MP3 players all were fought and lost by the entertainment industry. File sharing is just the latest incarnation of sharing. For most people, behaviorally, there is little difference to using the internet to share and the above mentioned devices. All of the above are used for copyright infringement.

        The internet can be likened to a large broadcast channel. HBO never gave permission to record any of their shows or movies, but people were able to do so. People were not thrown in jail or hit with ridiculous fines either. HBO was never sued for facilitating infringement either.

        Any legislation you may support will be perverted to other technologies as well.

        • Anonymous

          Personal copies have been covered in legislation. Something like 20 copies a year to friends and families is fine. But, when you are doing that in the millions, that’s where it becomes a problem. When places like Mega Uploads is making hundreds of millions off of someone else’s work. And frankly, the numbers I read for Kim Dotcom’s take home, wouldn’t even cover the cost of producing just one of the films he was offering. Remind me again, who has the failed business model? Or is that the file sharing model only proves successful, when you don’t have to pay for your product?

        • Anonymous

          @JoMat

          I’ve got news for you, JM, I have not bought new in decades. Before BT I shopped at second hand stores, pawn shops, goodwill, and Half Price Books to get movies, music and books. Recorded them if I like them off of HBO. None of that money goes to the artists, only the vendors. It was not “free stuff”, but a fraction of the cost of new.

          All BT is for me is convenience. I can get a movie a couple of months before it shows on HBO, and for music, mere weeks before it winds up in a pawn shop or second hand store.

          You cannot force anyone to buy new or support artists. I support musical artists by going to the shows and buying merchandise.

          I do not support commercial piracy for profit, but if people want to pay for a service that one can get free somewhere else, well PT Barnum was right…

          I would like to see this legislation, because last I heard, the industry says you cannot legally make a back-up copy of media you own. There is no fair use anymore. Before DRM was lifted you couldn’t copy it if you wanted, unless you had the appropriate software to break it.

          Can you prove that the someone in “someone else’s work” LOST anything by Kim Dotcom earning what he earned.

          I really know nothing about Mega Upload of KDC, but if people want to pay to use it, so what. I will stick to torrents.

          PS. I am an artist, a musician. I do not do it for the money, but rather the gratification of entertaining. I make money at it, but if/when it shows up on youtube or pirate bay, all the better.

  • anon

    Thanks to who ever sent this document to torrentfreak.

    • Danny

      It was in the Guardian before TF!

  • Coldtoon

    funny how they haven’t gone after shoutcast

  • Fsf

    If google agree to this BS. I’ll not use google anymore… DAMN don’t want to buy a new phone??

    • IDIOCRACY

      “DAMN don’t want to buy a new phone?? ” that’s why I bought the last symbian Nokia

    • Anonymous

      That is your right as a consumer in a capitalistic society. Condoning or protecting online piracy is attacking one of the major components of a free market and capitalism.

      • Guest

        lol.

        Piracy is the free market in action, buddy.

        As for capitalism, I fail to see how anybody can still consider it sacrosanct after all the shit it’s been responsible for. Do you think a plutocracy is an improvement over a democracy…?

        • Anonymous

          Piracy is not the free market in action. By your ideology, buying a car from a chop shop would be legal. Continuous theft and reducing revenues, adversely effects future investment. This is true is all industries. Even technology.

        • Anonymous

          yes it is.

          it is a better product for a better price, that is very free market.

          patents and copyright are anti free market, because their aim is to stop the competition

        • Guest

          “Piracy is not the free market in action”

          Wrong. The copyright industry has set prices beyond what millions of customers deems acceptable. It’s also introduced barriers like DRM and region locking that are deemed unacceptable, as well.

          But thanks to the powers of the free market, these millions of customers that the copyright industry has alienated have switched to a superior service: piracy.

          If the copyright industry wants these customers back, then they’ll have to offer a better value proposition than prices that are out of touch with reality and artificial barriers to accessing their content. Censoring the internet won’t cut it.

          Trying to hold back free market didn’t get them anywhere in the past, it hasn’t gotten them anywhere in the present, and won’t get them anywhere in the future.

          “Continuous theft”

          Piracy isn’t theft. If you want to look reasonable at all, you should probably start telling the truth.

        • Fellfromthesun

          “But thanks to the powers of the free market, these millions of customers that the copyright industry has alienated have switched to a superior service: piracy. ”

          Tis is about the stupidest thing I have ever heard in my life. Piracy can of course offer anything for free because they have invested ZERO resources –in time, labor, capital, creativity, etc, — in creating it. If I stole your car I could sell it for $5 and make a profit. That, of course, would be a “superior service” to the person who bought it. And before you spin out the old ‘but a digital file doesn’t cost anything!” freetard excuse, explain to me how, say, a 2-hour-movie that ends up as a file gets made for free?

      • [Redacted]

        It’s hardly a free market when those at the top stifle any attempt from others to enter the market.

      • Anonymous

        Censoring the internet is interfering with my rights as a consumer in this capitalistic society. If I want to purchase a generic drug from an Indian pharmacy, but the US government has rendered all their websites inaccessible to US residents, then my ability to consume has been hampered. I can understand how your decision to patronize a business or not is your right as a consumer, however, it is NOT the same when a person isn’t given a CHOICE in the first place.

        • Anonymous

          Drugs are tricky. And frankly, I wish they would take that out of this argument. If the US had affordable health care, it wouldn’t be an issue. And investment on new drugs is way more involved and expensive than making a movie. It’s hard to compare. I would consider this something to be discussed in a health care context. And if I’m not mistaken, copyrights expire after a certain amount of time. Maybe that is something that needs to be discussed with movies. 20 year copyright limit.

    • Jmorse43508

      I’m already not using Google thanks to the changes in their TOS, which makes it more difficult to opt out of online tracking.

      They are becoming more and more like Facebook when it comes to privacy. And everyone knows just how poor their record in this area is.

  • Qqqq

    that battles against sharing will make other riches – Nobody cant stop sharing seems stupid US dont understand that
    i think in future labels will be dead , nobody will buy Cds DVD and old formats , i belive in donations for independent artists – already happened but at low scale for now – they put music or video arts for free download and people can enjoy and suport them , make donations clicking adds etc – thats works , im shure everybody will donate at least 1$ or euro or will suport that kind of artists in some way – that will be the future of music video arts etc

    artists and labels that think will make money from sales in the same way as now ,selling old or new formats in stores /digital stores will loose ,world has evolved and can not return ,those who will not adapt to new conditions will disappear they must think and understand that

    music video arts – culture must be made for open people minds , to give them a light into darkness – not to become rich
    commercial “arts” made for masses are bullshit , a big lie , arstists who doing this dont deserve respect and to be named “artists” they doing that shit without true value culture just for money , they are just fuckers who want to become rich quickly and after stay lazy and be arrogant – they are a true parasites which dont help world to evolve

    a true artists made arts becouse have a “gift” call – talent , becouse have something to say , becouse have feelings to share with others , becouse want interact ,help,communicate ,exchange ideas with other people ,becouse have something spiritual to offer,because wants to express his personality and talent and enjoy people with that ,because think little bit differently then mass , becouse view some things differently
    a true artists has a mission and responsibility also, to educate to “open”
    people minds and fight for freedom
    for that things he deserve respect ,recognition,and a high social status (to have a good live ,good conditions to create, to teach others not to stay lazy or made arts without true cultural value and lie people with bullshits)

    new world is about technology, information, freedom and free acces at culture arts
    so to fight against that and put barriers and restrictions is totally wrong , nobody can win when fight with milions people (specially when they are young and smart -even dont have lot of money )

    • Anonymous

      Regardless of new pricing, which should be closer to $1-$5 for a movie, you can’t have open rampant piracy, and just expect people to “donate”. That’s ridiculous. In general, most people are jerks, and think it’s okay to rip someone off. You idea of “donations” would be nice, if humanity wasn’t so self serving that you could trust someone to pay a dollar.

      • Guest

        “you can’t have open rampant piracy, and just expect people to “donate”.”

        Really? You can’t? That’s funny, because it appears to be working so far.

      • [Redacted]

        “In general, most people are jerks, and think it’s okay to rip someone off.”

        That’s an extremely pessimistic view. You’ll find that most people are actually decent. It’s just that you don’t generally see this as the news doesn’t cover people not breaking the law.

        “You idea of “donations” would be nice, if humanity wasn’t so self serving that you could trust someone to pay a dollar.”

        Wikipedia, Humble Bundle, donations towards international disaster relief, etc.

        • Fellfromthesun

          “That’s an extremely pessimistic view. You’ll find that most people are actually decent. It’s just that you don’t generally see this as the news doesn’t cover people not breaking the law.”

          Try releasing a film or album in which you have invested your own time and money and get back to me on that one… the last album I released that I bothered to track was at a ratio of about 25:1 in illegal rips to paid sales after 2 weeks on release, and that was only the numbers of dodgy downloads I could track. The actual number was no doubt far higher, as there were loads of links with no metrics. It was at about 50:1 after 2 months…

      • Anonymous

        …you can’t have open rampant piracy.

        You also can’t have governments that continually censor, governments that continually CRIMINALIZE non-violent behavior, and governments that feel it’s okay to step on the rights of people in order to suck up to these corporations.

        Keep pushing people this way, and I GUARANTEE you, piracy will INCREASE as people become more and more frustrated and resentful.

        By believing that people are jerks, you are helping this become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

        • Anonymous

          You can, and we should criminalize embezzlement, fraud, monopolies and those who victimize others. Online piracy victimizes artists. There needs to be a forum for complaints to be heard. Fair and balanced for both large and small studios. No one is sucking up to a small production company. No one is protecting their rights. And frankly, in the 40 years I’ve been on this planet, humanity needs no help in being jerks. They just are. People stole the computers from Streetwise (A non-profit paper that help the homeless in Chicago), not just once but twice in the same 3 month period. There is nothing about it that is self fulfilling. Many people can not be trusted, nor relied on.

        • Danny

          @Jones

          The big labels harm the artists far more than ‘piracy’ ever has. At the end of the day it is not the artists or the indies that these organisations are trying to protect, its the big corporations and their fat pay cheques.

          Also the majority of people are not jerks, you as a person obviously bring this out in them and I can understand that by the way you have been talking on here! I personally do favours for everyone I know and in return they do favours for me, I am always there to lend a hand and not once has anyone betrayed my faith in people.

    • Fellfromthesun

      A “true artist” also has to pay rent. Freetard.

  • http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

    And if the big name search engines did this? Oooh, wow….. smaller names would start eating their lunch, to use a famous and accurate phrase.

    They are not going to do this and it’s damned well time for Hollwyood, the movie companies in general and the music companies to be slapped and given a wakeup call.

    The reason that the Pirate Bay and other ‘illegal’ (not always) things are popular? Hollywood is trying to sell us shit that is:
    1. Overpriced.
    2. Lacking in quality.
    3. Not available in the way that we want it to be.

    I could keep on going, but those are the big three points.

    • Fellfromthesun

      “Hollywood is trying to sell us shit that is:
      1. Overpriced.
      2. Lacking in quality.
      3. Not available in the way that we want it to be.”

      Right. That’s why so many people are downloading it.

  • http://twitter.com/BeardedDalek Bearded Dalek

    Seems like the simpler solution if they want this service is to PAY for it. I know Google already has it in place, and I believe Yahoo and Bing do as well. This is them wanting a service for free while they charge their own customers through the nose.

    • Anonymous

      true, they just have to buy adspace and their crappy service will be above the excellent piracy service

      them demanding this for free is just greedy and exactly what I would expect from them

    • IDIOCRACY

      So why does the MAFIAA not .. either buy the Piratebay or setup something similair for themselves, it makes money……so what is their problem…. oh yeah lack of vision and brains….

      • Bruddah

        this really gets me. with recent megaupload events etc, they know how much money can be made from a sevice people want

        “lack of vision and brains…” – nope, just lazy and stupid

    • Anonymous

      Google is guilty of aiding and abetting in copyright infringement. Helping with this issue is the very least they can do.

      • Guest

        And they can help by lobbying Washington to reform copyright law until it resembles something grounded in reality.

        • Anonymous

          I completely agree. I for one enjoy posting movie related items in my facebook. The laws need to be in line with the notion that not all uses are copyright infringement. Along with redefining fair use and parody in the context of the internet. But a huge network, specifically to download movies, songs and programs, being used by 150 million users, is counter productive to a global economy. Ignoring this is being naive to the greater good, along with striking a direct blow to artistic endeavor. It’s just as destructive as blanket legislation.

      • [Redacted]

        By that logic car manufacturers are responsible for deaths on the roads, pill manufacturers are responsible for drug overdoses, etc.

        • Anonymous

          As good as 3d is these days, movies can’t kill you.

        • [Redacted]

          JonesMatthew: As good as 3d is these days, movies can’t kill you.

          Congratulations on completely missing the point (intentionally or not).

        • Anonymous

          JonesMatthew: fine, then a better example for you

          do you close a road because it is used to smuggle goods?
          do you shutdown the whole public transport because someone used it without buying a ticket?

          that is what the entertainment industry is trying to do with the internet

        • Fellfromthesun

          “do you close a road because it is used to smuggle goods?
          do you shutdown the whole public transport because someone used it without buying a ticket?”

          No, but they do put up customs checks and impose fines on fare-jumpers. Of course doing the same thing to copyright infringers on the Net –making them pay a small fine if caught — would surely have you freetards foaming at the mouth. But it’s the same logic –people who don’t pay into supporting the system of public transport are freeloaders.

      • Bruddah

        “But a huge network, specifically to download movies, songs and programs, being used by 150 million users”
        i’ll add for you… “making a crapload of money”

        you know what i’d do if i had their resources? steal their idea and fucking give people what they want, watch the dollars roll in

        /facepalm

        • Anonymous

          The cost of making just one of the movies Mega Upload was pirating, would completely negate the $150 million Kim Dotcom pulled in last year. The math is off, even on Mega Upload. Streaming servers and cdn servers cost a lot of money. And from the numbers I’ve seen, Google advertising revenues wouldn’t even come close to covering costs on a major production. If the numbers added up, studios would jump on it in a minute. It just doesn’t. There is a cost involved. It can’t be free. A point that is continuously ignored on this subject. If there is a better way, let’s hear it. So far, I hear sound bites and generalizations and theories. No white papers, no case studies, no proof really that this “new model” exists. And frankly, any new model with moderate pricing, can’t compete with free. It’s delusional to think it shouldn’t be monetized.

        • Guest

          wtf?

          You’re talking about white papers, case studies, and proof when YOU CAN’T BACK UP A SINGLE THING YOU’VE SAID WITH ANY EVIDENCE WHAT. SO. EVER?

          This is bad comedy.

  • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

    Copyright Industry trying to take over the internet.

    Time to fight back.

    • Anonymous

      They are defending their right to a fair market. Not trying to take over.

      • Pilgrimman007

        Obvious troll is obvious.

      • Guest

        Your definition of a “fair market” is “when a business acts as a dictator to the consumers”, apparently.

        Yeah, that’s not how it’s supposed to work.

      • Anonymous

        wrong, they don’t want a free market, they want to continue their monopoly, which is the exact opposite of a free market.

        • Anonymous

          It’s the right of the artist to determine the method of distribution.

        • Anonymous

          well, we disagree on that point.
          but still, why are they shutting down those methods?

        • Guest

          It’s the right of the market to determine the value of the product.

      • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

        What rock……in an alternate universe… have you been living under ?

        They are defending their right

        No … they are attacking the majority’s right to freely share information

        fair market

        The internet is a FAIR market….
        if it can be copied ….endlessly at zero cost… it is worthless on the internet.
        If they make a product than can be copied for no cost…. it’s their problem… on how to monetize that product…..
        “Fair market” is not a monopoly to charge whatever you want for worthless copies , and have laws to punish all who “”illegally”" copy said worthlessness.

        Not trying to take over.

        Have ruined people financially….
        Thrown people in jail….
        Called people thieves, pirates among other lies…
        Lied about the “cost of piracy”….
        They have bought politicians to introduce internet censorship laws….
        Have taken websites offline that provided copies at their real value…
        WANT CENSORSHIP AT AN ISP LEVEL …ffs… even at a TLD LEVEL.

        Reality is…….
        the internet is a filesharing network…at it’s basic core…literally
        Pirates share worthless copies…
        People / websites PROFIT on the internet with working business models.
        The media industry would rather fight technology than adapt to it….. like did with cassette recorders and vhs recorders….

        • Anonymous

          A Ninja Movie is hardly a cure for cancer, and can not be defined as “sharing information.” And the cost of a movie isn’t in the copy, but in the production. On a minimum, a movie cost over $250,000 in labor alone. And that’s a modest budget. It’s not like a bunch of kids running around making a movie. It’s takes many hands and many dollars. You are ignoring the reality of what it takes to make a movie or TV show. It doesn’t cost, nothing. That is a ridiculous statement. And there is a response to an over priced product. Don’t buy it. Capitalism at it’s finest.

        • Anonymous

          I don’t buy it, I pirate it.
          Capitalism at its(!) finest

        • Guest

          What’s the difference between not buying something and going without it, and not buying something and downloading it for free? Aside from meaningless self-deprivation?

          Also, I’m starting to suspect you don’t actually know what “capitalism” means and are just using it as a jingoistic buzzword.

        • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

          @JonesMatthew

          paraphrase :
          movies cost $ to make…I apparently stated otherwise(“”ridiculous statement.”") .. the value of a movie is the cost of production “”

          I never said that it “”cost’s nothing to make a movie”". DID i ?

          Thought experiment….using your theory…of the the value of a movie..
          You invest $1million….. on taking a photo…. of a piece of dog crap…
          Is that photo worth $1million ?
          Are 1Billion copies of that photo worth…… ( @production cost)
          $ 1 quadrillion : $1,000,000,000,000,000 ? ( bigger than gdp of world )

          AS I SAID :
          If they make a product than can be copied for no cost…. it’s their problem… on how to monetize that product
          There are plenty of working models that monetize creations for artists… be it advertizing , services , events ,updates and exclusive access.

          People use netflix for the service….
          Use itunes for the service…
          watch free tv …paid for by advertizing.
          Go to the cinema….an event.
          the list goes on and on…

          The internet is………
          a free platform of filesharing….. some encrypted sharing….some not..
          But it is a FILESHARING NETWORK.
          Websites have evolved , profited in this arena of free…ADAPT or die

      • [Redacted]

        So trying to pass laws which give them the right to shut down websites in other countries without having to go through those countries’ courts isn’t trying to control the Internet?

      • Anonymous

        absolute bollocks! buying politicians that will then introduce laws that give the entertainment industries the right to remove websites, isn’t a fair market. all they want to do is destroy competition, instead of offering a better service, ie, COMPETING!

        • Anonymous

          Is Netflix not already doing that? Are not most of these movies already available online? Are not Disney and Sony already rolling out a programs that give free digital files when you buy a DVD? Where you argument falls apart, is that even modest prices can’t compete with free.

      • Chronoss2008

        and we the people gave you these rights and now i think you need to learn that by having them utterly removed so your kind never surfaces on the face of the planet as parasites

        • Anonymous

          So dramatic.

  • Anonymous

    yet again, restrictions and censorship being engaged on behalf of the entertainment industries, behind closed doors. no one else allowed to attend the meetings, let alone have discussions or give opinions.the UK government is as corrupt as the US!

    • Anonymous

      This will also protect that rights of individual artists and programmers.

      • Guest

        Yeah, like the individual artists and programmers who distribute their work using torrent sites and cyber lockers and don’t have affiliations with the industry.

        Oh wait…

        • Anonymous

          It’s the right of the artist to determine the method of distribution.

        • Anonymous

          right, so why does the MPAA and RIAA want to shut down those alternative methods?

        • Guest

          Oh look, I can ctrl-c ctrl-v too:

          It’s the right of the market to determine the value of the product.

          Anyway, I guess you don’t care about the small independant artists who rely on large platforms like cyber lockers or TPB to promote themselves. Only artists who play ball with the MAFIAA have rights, is that it?

      • Anonymous

        no, it will not, because indiviual artists and programmers use those so-called “pirate” channels.

        this will only hinder that, so that the artists will be forced to sign away their rights to the middle-men.

        • Anonymous

          I do not agree. It will allow them to sell their wares on their own site. Via pay pal, etc. Without someone posting it to millions, declaring themselves as the middle man. It’s the right of the artist to determine the method of distribution.

        • Anonymous

          @JonesMatthew
          look at what happened with the MegaSong
          UMG owned NO copyright of it whatsoever, but it felt like a threat to them, so they took it down with the power they have been granted.

          THIS is why those companies cannot have control over the internet, they will only abuse it to keep their dying industry.
          they are no longer needed, artists can reach an audience without a big label or a big studio backing them, and they want to stop that.

          the piracy is only an excuse, just like childporn.

        • Guest

          Except that offering your wares on your own site doesn’t give you a fraction of the exposure of offering your wares through hyper-popular “pirate” channels.

          So let’s say the industry gets its way and search engines start censoring out these “pirate” channels. As always, the little guy will be the one to get screwed. Also, if you’re going to repeat that line *again*, I might as well repeat mine: It’s the right of the market to determine the value of the product.

          Third time’s the charm?

      • [Redacted]

        Were the individual artists and programmers consulted on this, or is it just your MAFIAA masters assuming that everyone wants the same things they do?

        • Anonymous

          Yes, both artists and programmers. Filmmakers, musicians, game developers, app developers, etc. I’m a web developer who works on entertainment projects. Both large and small. Been doing it for over a decade. I’ve made films and made social networks. My work has been seen by millions, probably billions at this point, and only a few hundred. My films have been pirated, and watched hundreds of times over. And I can whole heartedly speak for my peers on this. Online piracy isn’t cool, and it is negatively effecting creative endeavors. I don’t come on here to be a troll, but to express my own experience. And to educate on what I know to be truth. Not just BS propaganda that is being pumped out on both sides. And for the record, I don’t drive a Mercedes and I don’t live in a mansion. It’s not this huge money making machine file sharers like to portray.

        • [Redacted]

          JonesMatthew: And I can whole heartedly speak for my peers on this. Online piracy isn’t cool, and it is negatively effecting creative endeavors.

          Tell that to the artists who have said they’ve made more money from their work being available on torrent sites, and the surveys that show that illegal downloaders spend more on music and film than people that don’t download. Hell, if it wasn’t for illegal downloading I wouldn’t have gone to my first concert (I’d only heard music from one band on the bill, so downloaded music from the other bands to see if it was worth going), and bought all the CDs from the bands that were playing.

        • Guest

          Hey, JonesMatthew. Thanks for linking to that website where individual artists and programmers agree that piracy is a bad thing and search engine censorship is a good thing. It was so informative!

          Sarcasm off.

          The more you fail to back up your words with evidence, the more it looks like “your MAFIAA masters assuming that everyone wants the same things they do”.

          “And I can whole heartedly speak for my peers on this. ”

          Based on what, some bullshit you just posted on a messageboard? Facts, please. Let’s see them.

          Hey, did you know I’m an astronaut? Yeah, I’ve been going up into space for a decade. Done missions large and small. And I can whole heartedly speak for my peers on this: we spacemen think piracy is totally cool and that JonesMatthew is super lame. Hey, I’m just expressing my own experience and telling the truth as I know it, y’know?

          My astronaut story carries the exact same weight as your “I’m a web developer!” story on the probability scale. Your move, punk.

        • Danny

          @JonesMatthew

          Please don’t speak for me. You do not represent my views in even the smallest detail.

          I am an engineer / programmer / web developer and in no way do I believe that copyright in its current state is a good thing. The problem is that you shouldn’t be able to make one thing and get paid for it for the rest of your life, being an artist should be like any other job but unfortunately the fat cats at the top seem to make all the money while the little guy gets royally fucked at every turn.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

    My theory is that the copyright industry has an ulterior motive here: they are trying to get Google and other sites to abandon or be judged in court to have abandoned their “safe harbor” status as a neutral intermediary, a “common carrier” in telecom parlance.

    It has long been the case that exercising editorial control makes you responsible for everything you publish or activity you facilitate; hence, the phone companies and ISPs really don’t want to get into monitoring the content of your conversations and network traffic, except to the extent that is needed to continue to provide access to all their customers. The search engines currently say they’re only exercising a degree of editorial control that’s necessary to remain neutral and stop people from gaming the system.

    So the industry is framing the matter as a binary choice between the search engines either continuing to “support [suspected] illegal sites” or to voluntarily exercise editorial control [without due process]. Both options are bad for the search engines, and for the Internet. An industry-friendly, tech-unsavvy judge or jury could be duped into interpreting the do-nothing option as condoning and profiting from infringement, and the do-something option would expose the search engines to immediate challenges to their safe-harbor privileges—which the industry would just love to see happen, because it establishes a nightmare precedent: not only would the actual infringers be liable/responsible, but all search engines, ISPs and the DNS system would be at risk of being targeted as ‘contributory’ partners in crime, if not infringers themselves.

    This is an all-out assault on the Internet through litigation, legislation, publicity campaigns, and these kinds of voluntary agreements. They would be perfectly happy if every site had to apply and be approved to be listed in a search engine, and if they could sue into oblivion anyone even peripherally connected to infringing activity. Why double-dip when you can triple or quadruple dip? One person infringes, two people and five businesses get sued!

    • http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

      Hit the nail on the head about the “safe harbor” that they are trying to make Google give up or maneuver them to unknowingly give up.

    • Anonymous

      Google is knowingly advertising websites that are guilty of copyright infringement. By definition, they are aiding and abetting.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

        Criminal guilt or civil liability must be established in court. It has not yet been established that it’s criminal for a search engine, in response to a request for sites matching certain keywords, to inadvertently mention the potential availability of potentially infringing content somewhere on the web. It is certainly not direct infringement. Whether the content is actually available and infringing also should be established in order to have a case, but a search engine generally cannot know who owns what content or analyze the content of websites in its index to determine whether something on each site is infringing.

        And every search engine is “advertising” every website, including those which violate the laws of governments which repress critical speech. Would you tolerate a precedent where any site which could potentially be running afoul of some country’s laws is, upon mere accusation by the offended party, deemed “guilty” and any search engine which lists such sites in any search results have secondary liability? It would surely be only a matter of time before that bites you in the butt.

        Anyway, copyright statutes only address direct infringement; they have no “aiding and abetting”-type clauses. So your terminology is wrong, but in common/case law there is a fragmented notion of indirect infringement or “secondary liability” which can be characterized as e.g. contributory or vicarious. There are limits to how far courts have been willing to go in holding liable these “aiders and abetters”, as you consider them; the further away you get from the direct infringer, the harder it is to say the party was encouraging, profiting from, or facilitating the infringement. Sony v. Betamax is an example on one side (VCR makers aren’t liable for infringing use of VCRs), and MGM v. Grokster is an example on the other (file-sharing software makers, depending on how they market the software, can be liable for infringement by users). Case law has yet to clearly establish the role of search engines and the degree to which they can be held responsible, but given the nature of the technology and the thorniness of the issues, I believe it’s going to work out in the search engines’ favor.

      • Anonymous

        they are not guilty.
        if they would be guilty they would no longer be online.

      • Guest

        ISPs knowingly allow customers to access Google. By definition, they are aiding and abetting as well.

        Apple, Microsoft, and the FOSS community make web browsers with built-in Google search. By definition, they are aiding and abetting as well.

        Computer manufacturers knowingly allow the computers they sell to connect to ISPs that knowingly allow their customers to access Google. By definition, they are aiding and abetting as well.

        Let’s censor everything. It’s the only way.

        • Anonymous

          Valid points, that all need to be discussed as part of this legislation. There needs to be a middle ground. Status quo, will not do.

        • Anonymous

          the status quo seems to work just fine

          movie studios for example report a record year each year, and yet they still see piracy as a threat.

        • Anonymous

          There needs to be a middle ground…

          Agreed.

          The problem occurs when MPAA/RIAA lobbyists throw ridiculous amounts of money to get legislation like SOPA/PIPA passed. There is also a problem with a president who signs ACTA under a questionable and obscure wording of the law in order to circumvent input from Congress.

          There NEEDS to be a middle ground. However, when one side has unlimited resources and the ability to give themselves increasing amounts of control… we won’t be moving towards a middle ground, we’ll be moving towards authoritarianism.

        • Guest

          Actually, those points aren’t valid. In addition, your “aiding and abetting” train of thought leads to the censorship of everything. That, in itself, is the point.

        • Anonymous

          to JonesMatthew:

          the trouble is, the entertainment industries dont want to ‘discuss’ anything with anyone. all they want to do is dictate who can do what, where, how, when, as long as they dont have to change their business model or compete with any other website or business. if they do, they want laws changed/extended/introduced that stops all else from happening, stops them having to compete and lets them keep the monopoly. every technological advancement, every new innovation that has come along that has made things easier for people to do something with movies and music, even if it’s only how to watch/listen to them, has been condemned and fought against by the entertainment industries until those new things have been stopped, banned or discarded. then along comes those same entertainment industries, 5 minutes later, using the exact same technologies/innovations. this time though, because they control those new technologies etc, and only they are making money from using those new technologies, it’s perfectly ok for people to use them. in other words, there is nothing wrong with new technology, new innovation, as long as the entertainment industries control it, can make money from it, can keep their monopoly and no one else can!

      • [Redacted]

        Google is a search engine. Search engines are supposed to be neutral, displaying results relevant to what you searched for. If a website is infringing the copyright owners should go after the website not the search engine.

        • Anonymous

          They are not neutral. They filter out pornography.

        • Anonymous

          they do not (at least not for me, since i disabled that silly filter)

        • Danny

          JonesMatthew fails at life….. again!

  • RIAAtarded

    No privately held company should have the ability to censor my access based on values or viewpoint of another. Once we start down that route where does it end? The world needs less censorship not more and where does MPAA get off thinking that their viewpoint is the correct one especially for enforcement on a global scale? If this is how we effect global change count me out there is much better causes that need to be addressed long before this foolishness. Just another case of the bought and paid for politicians forgetting where their borders end. This BS reminds me to much of Pinky and the Brain trying to take over the world every episode. When will you get it through your head piracy has been around since the 1500s, now if you haven’t squashed it by now maybe…and i’m just spitballing here but maybe your approach is just wrong. Radical idea try changing to give options for purchase rather then restrictions on availability and use. Don’t let the creativity end with the artists is can easily come up with solutions as well.

  • Anonymous

    this type of censorship will affect loads of websites, legitimate and illegal, whether selling, buying, searching, hosting and a hundred other services, as well. perhaps it’s about time that all that rely on the internet for their business stood up together this time?

  • anyonecanpost

    They’re basically telling Google, Yahoo and Bing how to do their own work.

    Maybe those search engines should also hand the copyright industry another document, with suggestions and ideas that could help them get on with the times and become more innovative to compete with piracy.

    That would be much better than making the search engines give us artificial, tampered results.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Hugh-Easton/100002795317730 Hugh Easton

    Google autocomplete already censors the list of suggestions it shows you, for instance I tried “megaupload” earlier today and that is blocked. “Collateral murder” was blocked last time I tried it as well, and there’s probably a lot of other stuff that they’re subtly hiding from public view in the same way. Google, yahoo, and bing are all US companies under the control of the US government, so the yanks have pretty much the entire search engine market sewn up at the moment. I wonder how easy it would be to produce a peer to peer search engine that would be free of US governmental interference (and wouldn’t log every search term you use along with your IP address)?

  • Pingback: SearchCap: The Day In Search, January 27, 2012

  • Anonymous

    When you mix an entertainment industry that will stop at nothing to get more money, with a government that will stop at nothing to get more power, some very bad things happen.

  • http://www.facebook.com/orphicdragon Trisha Lynn Dragon

    Dear Copyright Thugs,

    I offer you this 2 step solution to all of your problems, free of charge. Sharing is caring after all.

    *ahem*

    Step 1: Eat shit.

    Step 2: Die.

    Use this with my blessings you toad felching cum guzzlers. :)

    • Data

      Aww, don’t hold back, tell us how you really feel!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YLR2S66PQPPLXYTFUELQHNNQOA asi

      Since they are already full of shit so I guess now it’s time for step 2.

    • Anonymous

      Step 3:
      Hack their servers and release all their rip-off accounting schemes !

  • Bruddah

    where will it stop when all search engines are forced into censoring results purely on the whim of some [insert big powerful company here] exec? we know already that dmca requests get adhered to even if they don’t even own the rights. how easy would it be for big software labels to ‘dmca’ their open source rivals website, etc?

    can’t see google being the first to subscribe to killing their own business tho

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000164139407 Mike Thorne

    This is a good idea, and not censorship at all. They are not saying to block the websites like SOPA and PIPA, etc. Only to de-rank the webpages that contain copyrighted material. As long as this doesn’t effect legit files, this shouldn’t be a problem at all. Uncopyrighted works’ pages shouldn’t be deranked, but copyrighted works should.

    • Anonymous

      it is censorship, plain and simple.

      you know WHY those pirate sites are above the “official” sites? because they offer a better product. and instead of adapting and giving the consumer what he wants they want to remove the competition.

    • [Redacted]

      If a shop’s selling illegal items you don’t go after the phone book publisher you go after the shop owner. If a company has a problem with a website they should go after the site’s owner.

  • Pingback: SearchCap: The Day In Search, January 27, 2012 | Market 7

  • Mainframe Xaiver

    I fail to see where Hollywood is suffering hardship when they keep recording profits at the box office

    • Anon

      Or when they can still pay millions to bribe politicians.

    • Anonymous

      That’s the really sad part, mate. With all the anti-SOPA/PIPA support out there, and people are still going to the movies.

      If Hollywood wants to treat all of their customers like a bunch of thieving low-lifes with no other value than to continually overpay for their worthless products… then it’s about time we start thinking about a boycott of all MPAA/RIAA-related services and products.

    • RIAAtarded

      no kidding the twilight saga which is mind numbing and singlehandedly ruined vampires as a horror genre grossed over $2,504,591,671 for the 4 movies according to wiki. So not only aren’t they losing money but they have the ability to make billions off trash. It really is time we stop support these guys altogether chances are they blame any dip in sales on piracy not their own lack of vision but they need to know we aren’t willing to have them dictate what and how we consume our media.

  • In Praise of Dignity

    It’s oddly ironic that the jews in hollywood criticize Hitler for his actions and yet they support similar tyrannical measures as he would have used.

    They advocate censorship, limiting free speech, strangling innovation, an erosion of privacy, using government thugs to strong arm people, a loss of due process, and criminalizing the very idea of sharing….sharing with others as a crime.

    These people have become the enemies of freedom.

    A person is already threatened by the fbi and interpol every time they watch a dvd. How nice of them to treat their loyal customers as “pre-criminals”. How many dvds will a person see in thier lives?; ie, how many minutes or hours of their lives will be wasted being forced to watch threat messages? The dvd is designed so that you are FORCED to see the warning, you can’t skip it. It’s like some pavlovian conditioning.

    If you violate copyright, you will pay a huge fine and go to prison.

    If you violate copyright, you will pay a huge fine and go to prison.

    If you violate copyright, you will pay a huge fine and go to prison.

    If you violate copyright, you will pay a huge fine and go to prison.

    It’s like walking into a store and instead of the attendant saying “Hello, welcome to our store”, they say, “Don’t steal anything”. I personally don’t like being threatened by any business and if I am, I NO LONGER support such a business. I will not support any business that threatens me or treats me like a criminal. This is why I am now boycotting the airlines. So the government thinks it is appropriate for TSA agents to grope the citizenry, expose us all to harmful radiation, and treat us all with disrespect? Guess what geniuses, since the inception of TSA “authority”, no airline has gotten a penny from me, and they won’t ever again. I have not purchased a dvd or a music cd in twelve years. I have not attended a cinema in twelve years.

    Show me some appreciation and respect as your customer or go straight to hell.

    The kind of world they would like to create would be far worse than Nazi Germany.

    Pot….kettle.

    • skorn

      Your a racist. I hate to think that your on my side of the argument.

      • Guest

        “I hate to think that your on my side of the argument.”

        That might be the point…

        • Light

          Chris Dodd? You use a single person as your validation for an entire industry?

          I suppose if AT&T only hired only one Hindu out of tens of thousands of employees, that should be considered a fair representation of Hindu people achieving equality?

          He is not engaging in a misdirection. He is pointing to the heart of the matter in hollywood..that jews control that industry. So when you want to discuss the advocacy they are involved in, it is by default a jewish contention.

      • EatMyTurds

        And “your” illiterate – not to mention PC.

        Fail X 2.

      • Rabbi MAFIAAwitz

        A Jew admits that Jews run Hollywood. Is he “a racist” too?
        http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/19/opinion/oe-stein19

        You fucking retard.

    • Guest

      What you’re doing is known as misdirection.

      “Let’s blame the Jews instead of addressing any real problem!”

      Ironically, you’re doing the same thing as the copyright industry.

      “Let’s blame the pirates instead of addressing any real problem!”

      By the way, guess who isn’t a Jew? The chairman and CEO of the MPAA, Chris Dodd. What! How did that happen!

      • Reposting

        Chris Dodd? You use a single person as your validation for an entire industry?

        I suppose if AT&T only hired only one Hindu out of tens of thousands of employees, that should be considered a fair representation of Hindu people achieving equality?

        He is not engaging in a misdirection. He is pointing to the heart of the matter in hollywood..that jews control that industry. So when you want to discuss the advocacy they are involved in, it is by default a jewish contention.

      • Guest

        Yes, of course. Jews control the industry. That explains why the head of the industry is a fucking Irishman.

        That makes perfect sense.

        No, he isn’t engaging is misdirection at all. Instead of blaming specific people directly, like Chris Dodd, we should blame a nebulous bunch of non-specific ‘Jews’. That’ll get things done!

        Hey, you know what? That gives me a great idea! Let’s start a Whitehouse petition against JEWS! Who’s with me?

        • Reply

          It’s not hard to see why they chose Chris Dodd as the official mouthpiece for the MPAA. He is “mainstream” America in his appearance and therefore the ideal person to sell the agenda to the American public.

          But the REAL reason he was ideal was because of his connections…political and otherwise. That is not hard to understand is it?

          What you yourself are doing is clearly misdirection and obfuscation. You are doing what the jews in hollywood film studios, television, and the media always try to do…stay out of the limelight…to take the focus off their hegemony and sell the idea of their companies being “mainstream” America. There is nothing mainstream about these companies…film studios, television studios, and media outlets are heavily controlled by jews.

          The people that we need to focus on here are not the mouthpieces, the administrators, the actors who are in the limelight, but the ones who like to stay in the shadows. The faces you never see. The names you don’t know. The ones making the decisions at the highest levels. The ones with real power and influence.

          No more obfuscation.

  • Chaz

    They can ask, but Google and the others are quite adult and mature enough to say a whopping big NO to such stupid and idiotic ‘requests’. If they become demands, the jack-boots have returned and we might as well have lost WW2.

  • BLT

    In regards to de-ranking: Yep, having to move to page 3 is going to have a significant impact on filesharing.

    • Anonymous

      it might stop new pirates.
      that’s why we must counter-act by more education on how to use bittorrent etc.

  • Pingback: Copyright Industry Calls For Broad Search Engine Censorship | Buchanan Report

  • Anonymous

    1. It is not a search engines job to police copyright.

    2. Censorship is almost always bad and always abused.

    3. If websites get lower ranking if subject to court action then court action would occur more often. Remember DaJaz1?

    4. To prioritise their desired business means their independent rivals would be subject to an anti-competitive act and would turn website ranking into more court cases.

    5. We in the UK are already subject to French censorship. Why Google, Why? It was only a court order for France.

    6. Website rankings on Google are based on popularity. So I hope they were told to go away and compete in a free market.

  • Anonymous

    lol, who cares what the copyright industry wants!
    Total-Privacy dot US

  • DSLAM

    Check out Voluntary Collective Licensing and the EFF. It’s the only way forward. Everyone wins.

  • Oppressive Regime

    Quote; “We would propose that prioritisation be enabled for searches that contain any of the following key search terms: “mp3?, “flac”, “wma”, “aac”, “torrent”, “download”, “rip”, “stream” or “listen”, “free”

    Too bad, my music library consists of nothing but ogg vorbis files.

    And wtf? “free” to be censored? this is taking the piss. Stallman won’t be happy i can see him raging a 40page blog post by the end of the week.

    The again, these capitalist scumbags which are the RIAA/MPAA are probably ashamed that “land of the free” is not free.

    Oh fun, america is at the root of destroying the world YET AGAIN. Someone stop it, please.

    • foff

      WTF! They want to censor the word free. Are they out of their double fucking minds? We need a permanent solution to these people. They are much worse than Nazi’s

      • Whosethis

        I wouldn’t say much worse then the nazis but definitely close.

      • Whosethis

        I wouldn’t say much worse then the nazis but definitely close.

  • Dia

    Wouldn’t it be odd for google to boost results for RIAA sites when you usually have to pay for a good ranking (in google these are separate, right?).

  • Jabbathehut

    so they want google to censor everyone else and promote theirs. wow.

  • Anonymous

    Here is where we are going, and Hollywood is not going to like it:

    “Boycott Hollywood.”

    Don’t think it can’t happen. It will happen.

    Censor our Internet… we’ll cut off yer fukkin blood supply…

    …douchebags.

    You idiots are playing with fire.

  • Guest

    It shows how dumb they re because if I put Flac into google will I get some great iTunes like store selling flac?

    That’s right there is not one you bunch of morons.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mic-Dot/100002567167151 Mic Dot

    this is so stupid.. lower search rankings? how do they do that? so wikipedia and google will now be on the second page? maybe they will make a button in searc h to search for the real search data starting on the second page? and they can keep all of their junk on the first page. aww, and http://www.madedownloads.com was just starting to get popular. hopefully the bill stays in the u.s. only, if they do impliment it cause i get a pile from all over.

  • Pingback: Copyright Industry Calls For Broad Search Engine Censorship | TorrentForce Blog

  • Sippydownsdrive

    all this heated discussion because people want stuff for free on the internet

    if people were honest and honourable and bought their entertainment there would no need for all these laws and legislation that impact on the honest joes in society

    Thank you greedy freeloading pirates!!!!!!!!! for nothing!!!

    • Anonymous

      People don’t want stuff for free, they just want the stuff. And it’s not here. So give it to me now.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

      No amount of guilt over piracy, nor any sense of moral superiority one might develop by avoiding it, will ever cause more money to flow into that person’s pocketbook. How you expect an endless stream of royalties to flow out of that pocketbook and into your bank account is a mystery. At some point you’ll recognize the futility of imposing artificial scarcity by overcharging for works that are transmitted from person to person as easily as ideas are replicated through speech. There’s money to be made, still and perhaps always at least partly from direct sales, don’t worry. But you must abandon the sense of absolute entitlement to be paid whatever you demand, to support whatever lifestyle you want, in perpetuity, for works created in the distant past perhaps not even by you personally, and for that money to come from every single person who possesses or in some way accesses those works.

    • Guest

      All this heated discussion because the entertainment industry has made a nice little racket out of gouging cutomers and is willing to hijack the government in order to preserve it.

    • Ugly American

      “all this heated discussion because people want stuff for free on the internet”

      Way to miss the entire point. What people want is:
      A. Choice
      B. Reasonable prices
      C. No corporate censorship / dictatorship

      “if people were honest and honourable and bought their entertainment there would no need for all these laws and legislation that impact on the honest joes in society”

      And how does one “buy” what isn’t available, out of print, released in a timely fashion or infested with DRM?

      “Thank you greedy freeloading pirates!!!!!!!!! for nothing!!!”

      You’re welcome, MAFIAA shill – here’s what “greedy freeloading pirates” DO buy:
      A. Hosting
      B. Usenet access
      C. Expensive broadband
      D. External storage devices
      E. Band merchandise, tickets to live performances, etc.

      “Freetards,” huh? You clueless fucking moron. Troll elsewhere. Thanks.

  • DRuNKeN MaSTeR

    “search engines would no longer link to sites such as The Pirate Bay and isoHunt” – good thing I have these sites in my bookmarks for easy and fast 1-click access…

  • http://cyberkiller.pip.verisignlabs.com/ Cyber Killer

    Lol what?! FLAC? Like shiiii… Show me at least 1 fu*** music webshop where I can buy FLAC files of the popular “artists”. Fullstop. First they should provide the service, then they can want to have it advertised, but they should do it the way the rest of us are doing it – fu*** buy advertising from the search engines, yeah, with cash.

    • Bloxanymous

      Hey, don’t you remember?
      Piracy is hurting their little butts so much, they’re way too broke to spend fucktons of cash on anything but politics.

  • Anon

    When they’ve turned the web into another commercial platform I will stop using it, simple as. I haven’t watched TV for years, 33% of anything on TV is commercials, The TV shows that have an hour slot usually have a 40 minute runtime, the ones that have half hour slots have 20 minute runtime. TV is rarely on in our house, usually it’s to see if the ‘news’ is reporting what is really happening, sadly it usually isn’t.

  • Anon

    If Bill Gates can afford to give $750 million dollars to charity why doesn’t he just give each of the American senators $1 million dollars and say ‘LEAVE THE FUCKING INTERNET ALONE’

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

      That would be like giving a cop a medal every time they ignore you instead of harassing you. You don’t reward people for doing what’s expected of them in a civil society. A basic amount of choosing to do no harm should be the status quo.

  • Liberty

    This is no longer about file-sharing in and of itself. The issue is now much bigger than that.

    This has become an issue of entities using copyright as an excuse to erode your personal freedoms, to limit free speech, to censor, and to control the internet itself. ACTA, SOPA, PIPA are all laws that threaten not just the internet, but your personal freedoms and way of life. If you think this is only an issue of downloading a movie, you are missing the forest for the trees.

    It’s just like what the U.S. government is doing in regard to terrorism.They know the topic of “terrorist” or “terrorism” is a hot button issue with most Americans so they use that as excuse to take away our personal freedoms. For example, when they want to push such things as The Patriot Act, useless wars, NDAA, TSA, etc. all they have to do is mention “terrorism” and all the mindless will just fall in with it, offering up their civil liberties on the altar of this “just cause”. What horse****. If you live in America, your chances of being killed by a terrorist are about the same as being struck by lightning while being bit by a shark at the same time..or perhaps being mortally wounded by an errant champagne cork.

    I would think that the biggest threat to our lives is our own government!

    The wars that America has been involved in since 9-11 are contradictory in terms. We assume they were conducted to make America look strong to the extremists, but we don’t look so strong now do we?..a nation bereft of hope, mired in debt to the Chinese, practically bankrupt, and skirting a major depression. Our politicians have the lowest approval ratings of any in history.
    When all liabilities are assessed, this country’s national debt is presently around 57 trillion dollars..much more than the corporate controlled media will ever report. The unemployment figures are actually 20-30% and higher in certain areas..again, much higher than the corporate controlled media will ever report.

    But this was all for a “just cause”, right? Or maybe it was to make numerous industries ultra rich and capitalize on middle-eastern territories and resources. It was for global hegemony, not to honor the victims of 9-11 and preserve America. We can’t even properly honor the firemen and policemen that courageously helped in the towers and died there.

    These entities are hijacking these causes as an excuse to take away your rights. After 9-11, the “news” sources repeatedly drummed the word “hijacking” into the American consciousness. From my perspective, the greatest hijack was not the efforts of the Muslim extremists, but the hijacking of America by elites and their bought off political puppets who used that event for their own malicious agendas.

    The copyright supporters are now using the excuse of copyright and nebulous profit losses as an excuse to take away your freedom, privacy, and civil liberties. This claim is their “just cause”.They are attempting their own “hijacking”. They seek their own hegemony.

    Stop them!

    Wake up America!

    Wake up world!

    The cause of liberty needs you!

    • Ugly American

      The best comment ever written on TF – suitable for framing. Respect!

  • Markets should win

    It’s VERY basic 101 of economy. All the markets self optimize and remove middle men. Big entertrainment corps produce the stuff but also want to act as middle men and the free market want to remove the latter like it should be.

    Therefore their only hope to fight the market is to artificially alter its rules and impose some draconian “laws” to keep existing as money sucking middle men.

  • me

    I saw this coming for a long time: search engines are nothing more than centralized choke points for the MAFIAA. We need an uncensorable, distributed anonymous search engine to be truly independent of Google & Co.

  • Pingback: The Only Thing You Need To Know About ACTA - Falkvinge on Infopolicy

  • Pentrio

    We live in an age where entertainment can get you thrown into jail. Maybe we should prioritize and cure cancer first. RIAA and MPAA are devils, they have the money, they have the resources, all they care about is themselves and how to get MOAR MONEY. 20 euros for a cd, bahahahahahahahah. That might’ve made sense 10 years ago but now it’s just silly.

    Before we know it we’re back in the dark ages. All because of ‘entertainment’.

  • Angry Voter

    No organization, company or person should be able to use any government services if they are guilty of tax evasion.

    They should be compelled to pay back the entire tax they evaded plus interest.

    Failure to do so in a reasonable time (say 1 year) should result in forfeiture of all assets to repay people who did pay their taxes during those years.

  • Pingback: Copyright Industry Calls For Broad Search Engine Censorship. | No Agenda Global Radio

  • Guest

    Hey guys, remember when we used to be free to do whatever we wanted on the internet?

    • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

      It’s the start of what everyone was forecasting when they argued for net neutrality…

  • Chronoss2008

    sphider.eu grab it while you can folks

  • TrollusMaximus

    USA RULES THE WORLD

    BYE PIRATES

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

      WAKE UP, SHEEPLE! RON PAUL 2012!

      j/k

  • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

    See what happens when you give them an inch? Censorship is a slippery slope. Google’s attitude about this is probably starting to imitate Macbeth’s attitude towards murdering people: initial doubts, followed by cautious enthusiasm and then greater and greater alarm at the sheer scale of the undertaking and still no end in sight.

  • Pingback: ????????????, ??? ??? ???? ????? ?? ACTA - ?????????? ?? ????????????

  • Pingback: ????????????, ??? ??? ???? ????? ?? ACTA - ?????????? ?? ????????????

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Whoisb-Whoisbid/100002926000478 Whoisb Whoisbid

    If we are to take this logic because of Megaupload e.g. http://whoisbid.hubpages.com/hub/MEGAUPLOAD-IS-SHUT-DOWN then we should also expect that search engines will help those who have patents that are being infringed. WHAT ABOUT PATENT LAW and NOT just copyright. Original patent owners lose billions of dollars every year because someone else is using their technology and benefitting from it because of high positions in search engine rankings.

  • Ucksay

    google should simply delist ALL MPAA/RIAA content. so that they will NEVER MAKE MONEY off the internet.

    • Angry Boid

      Actually, when you stop to think about it, that is a very very good idea.

  • Angry Boid

    Guess Obama never really thought of the youth vote when he authorised the FBI to run the internet (yes, the global internet) on behalf of the American entertainment industry.
    Guess this kind of behavior never really mattered to the Stasi in East Germany or SAVAK in Iran.
    Guess it’s gonna matter to Obama now.
    Goodbye youth vote.
    Hello moon colony.

  • Enuff!

    Global Society Calls for Copyright Industry Beat Down

  • Anonymous

    Hey, why doesn’t Google and the rest of them just block ALL references to movies and music. If the entertainment industry doesn’t want to be part of the internet and the future, perhaps we should simply give them their wish. A simple filter that cuts out any and all referenced to copyrighted material would be cheaper for the search engines than having to spend all of that money and manpower picking and choosing to suit an industry who isn’t going to pay a dime for the service.

    • DocGerbil100

      A lovely idea that runs into the same problems as any other filter not properly articulated by the law.

      First, the second Google starts censoring voluntarily, they lose their neutral carrier status and become legally liable for everything they link to, whether they know about it’s content or not.

      Second, the MAFIAA-affiliated companies have produced a huge amount of product over the years. How many movie titles, TV show names, TV episode titles, band-names, album titles, track titles have there been? RIAA-affiliates in the US alone apparently still produce somewhere between six and eight million audio-tracks a year. It’s therefore very likely that almost every memorable word and phrase in the English language has already been used as a title for one of their products at some point. Google might have very little left to list even if they censored only a small fraction of them.

      Finally, unless they want to delist the entire internet outright, they have to check which pages carry or refer to copyrighted content and which ones merely use the same phrases. As with censoring on behalf of the content industry, the manpower requirements involved in doing this are impossibly high from the outset – they’d need to hire an army to do it.

  • Ovidius

    An absolutely useless and desperate attempt.
    All the people who pirate files at present already have their favourite websites bookmarked and burned into their memories, not to mention that, while a google search might block the websites themselves, they would not block blogs and websites describing the various torrent websites and their pros and cons.
    I’ll be damned if I don’t do it if this happens.
    PATHETIC.

  • Werfwf

    How will people find the free mp3′s I make and put online?

  • Bdb1958

    i hack everything i can get

  • Marc Edwards

    the request to rank websites that provide legal content is reasonable. the other 2 are kinda crap…

  • GuestMatthew

    @JonesMatthew

    Want to fight the criminals? Then go after the biggest criminals of them all, THE GOVERNMENT, THE CORPORATIONS AND BANKS you brainwashed parasite!!!

  • Pingback: Obama Gets Oscar Nod | Random Ramblings from IowaDawg

  • http://www.squidoo.com/guerrilla-marketing-defined Hamza

    Entertainment industry must learn that if they don’t change with changing times then they will simply meet the fate of Dodo.Look at newspapers with the arrival of internet most of the newspapers are in a loss making position.If they would have earlier identified potential of internet then they would have been in a much better position.These attempts run against the basic appeal of internet as a medium of free information

  • Plop

    Excuse the bad language, but…

    what about all the independent musicians and their independent distribution methods? How the fuck are we supposed to compete with that kind of skewed favouritism in the marketplace? That’s just a straight up unfair business practice and/or monopolistic abuse of corporate dominance. Fuck the MAFIAA and all their content, fuck them up their stupid irrelevant dead fucking leeching arses for not being able to compete in a free market economy.

    When the revolution comes these fuckers are going to BE the fucking proverbial wall that all the other motherfuckers are put up against to be shot.

    • Alex

      megabox intended to do this, then megavideo was closed.

  • Hotmaillulwut

    Censorship is unacceptable in any form, especially when it’s to accommodate private interests.

  • Pingback: Het enige wat je écht moet weten over ACTA « Piratenpartij.nl Blog

  • Guest

    I hop that Google, Bing and Yahoo tell them to go fuck themselves.

    Otherwise there is many alternatives.

  • Just Say No to Mossad

    There is something I would like to bring out into the light.

    I am surprised no one has brought this topic up before in all our discussions.

    The questions I have…

    Considering that hollywood studios, tv studios, and media outlets are controlled by the jews, where does all this money go?

    What political agendas are they supporting beyond their own self-interests?..ie, beyond copyright?

    What else are they supporting with their money?

    And the most important question, how much of this hollywood money slithers its way back to israel and mossad?

    We know that mossad operates tech companies and others in the U.S. that are basically shell companies for funneling money. What role does hollywood play in this distribution of cash?

    If you are an American, you have long been duped into thinking israel is an ally to the U.S. Think again. Mossad is a collection of lying, murdering thugs who manipulate others for their own gain. They are NOT America’s ally. They are not anyones ally. Although it is not released to the American public, the FBI and CIA consider mossad as a threat to this country.

    Something a little unusual happened right before 911. U.S. intelligence received word from French and Egyptian connections that there was an attack imminent from muslims. When enquiring about the origin of this information, it was learned the information came from mossad representatives. The CIA and FBI were strongly suspicious of this information and saw the mossad effort as “blowing smoke” to take attention off of mossad operatives and laying the blame on muslims.

    Think long and hard about this.

    - Wouldn’t israel gain a great deal by having all americans hate muslims?

    - Wouldn’t israel gain a great deal to embroil the U.S. in middle eastern wars, basically using American military might as an instrument to achieve their own ambitions in the middle east?…now using the Americans against Iran?

    - Wouldn’t it serve the interests of all of those entities who want to control the U.S. and take away your civil liberties with tyrannical laws?

    - Why are there connections between some facets of american intelligence and al-qaeda? Why are there connections between mossad and muslim extremists?

    Talk to Palestinians and others in that region. Read the news reports (the unfiltered, unbiased versions…if you can get those, rare as they are) and you will discover that nine times out of ten israel is the instigator of conflicts in that area.

    To see israels aggression and bullying in action, please watch the independent documentary “This Palestinian Life” ( available on TPB and others).

    Make the connection…

    Jews control hollywood, tv studios, media outlets + lots of cash + political influence + support for israel = money and influence for mossad

    American government take note…NO MORE MONEY TO ISRAEL AND MOSSAD! Cut them off NOW! Let’s take care of our own country and citizens instead of giving it to these sons of bitches.

    Filesharers, be proud of not giving money to this “industry”. Boycott them. NO MORE MONEY TO HOLLYWOOD!

  • Guest of a Guest

    If “they” delist results… That would get the search index sites sued at some point.

    Search engines are sort of like census takers. Go and count up who is there first and foremost. Then you can rank and give status to those you have counted to fit those counted into categories.

    If a census taker likes to skip over people who are black/white/gay/old/young/straight etc that will be trouble down the line. Also that is not a real and valid census then. Same with delisting a site just because it gets tagged a rouge or illegal. You are not making a good map of the internet if 15% of it is not accounted for. If your competition does get a 100% listing and you don’t: You will lose in business at some point.

    I say let the search engine sites lower the rank of the bad boy pirate sites. Okay by me. My goal is to get warez. I don’t care what Google does to it’s code.

    It is a simple trick of programing to filter right to where ever the listings for those sources of links and torrents are at, even at low rank.

    So you’d Google ‘artist name and FLAC and torrent’. What would come up normally, under the draconian rules, is the clean and approved RIAA and MPAA sites for legal download on the first two pages from Google. With a simple plug in, a pirate would get his browser to display the range(s) of results from wherever those low ranking pirate links and sites that hold the links are demoted to. Start at page 88 of the Google results if that is where the demotion buried them too in that made up case.

    The control freak governments and RIAA dicks think they have won since their results come up on top and only their results come out on top. They don’t know how the net works and with a simple script and plug in any person can see the good links to warez with only a few extra cycles on the processor to display those filtered listings.

    Pirates win! Again… And for real.

    Some men are pissed because their Filesonic links are now dead. Boo fucking hoo. Same boys cried when Napster got sued since that was the end of filing sharing. Yet file sharing lived on.

    We got Bittorrent. Then that was threatened. DLL came and is now shaky for the moment but still going.

    Computers can copy files and transmits data over networks. File sharing never will die since it is a function of what computers do. Laws come and go about what is legal or not.

    So what on laws? Game the system (of law) since the system is a game in itself. Or wait it out or fight to get the laws on your side.

    Stop living in the past and look ahead on the whole file sharing issue. Some losers still want their Y2K Napster back I am sure. Not going to happen. Few men still want torrents to never be throttled. Not going to happen. Some men now want a reset so Filesonic and MU once again work. Not going to happen.

    The future of file sharing is not the network. It is NOT what you share nor where you share and where you store nor how you transmit (share up or down).

    The future of file sharing is a chip. Hardware that is build into whatever device you use that encrypts all the functions of the device, from local storage to data transmission using a dedicated chipset on board to do so.

    From your smart phone to your laptop to desktop, you can totally encode and hide what is on there and what traffic goes to and from your device. The chip in question can have OEM defaults for the encryption but also let the user flash it and put his own ones so no one else can have a master list to read the secure info.

    You can sit in the middle of the USA next to an FBI agent whose boyfriend is the head of the RIAA and simile at both jokers as the smart phone in your pocket sends and gets (making and using the public-private keys needed) all the pirated warez you want, right there and then.

    All the traffic is just noise to the carrier network. You will be billed for data usage from your ISP, but content transferred is unknown by them. The data is likewise all encrypted on your storage device too. Any one can look locally at what you have, but they can only see what you have if you let them.

    See you in 15 years when this is the norm. It is cool since you and I and everyone else saw each other in 5 years after Napster went down and torrents hit and then in five years on from that, when DLL was the fad.

    Progress and going ahead! Don’t worry about the past since that is gone anyhow. Learn from the past but don’t stress out over it.

    For now? Maybe I will torrent some more (VPN or not) and hit some DLL links to get what I want.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/NRM3MZJY27GRYFOKCTBZFKITAY res0r9lm

    CALL TO ARMS. Stop supporting these fucked up companies and share more files.

  • Whitespiral

    If Google concents to lower their results to the second page, the media industry will fight to have them go back to the 10th. Soon after, they will ask Google to move them to the 50th page, because almost nobody searches that many pages deep. And so on. No matter what Google gives them, they will want more. I say, Google, please delist the names of everyone who works lobbying for the media industry=, and anyone who supports them. That’ll teach them.

  • Pingback: Anonymous

  • Anon

    Perhaps the search engines just should stop indexing music sites altogether. Separating legal, partially illegal and illegal sites would take too much effort anyway, so just get rid of it all. Collateral damage like blocking copyright industry sites from search results might be caused, but I don’t think that’d hurt much either.

  • Pingback: La seule chose que vous devez savoir à propos d’ACTA, par Rick Falkvinge « SAM7BLOG

  • Pingback: Acta pour les nuls | salefouineuse

  • Koolbigkat

    What the Service providers like Google, Yahoo, Firefox and such should do, is give EQUAL treatment to both. If there is a request for censorship of any title, reciprocate evenly. Censor any mention of the subject matter from the internet. If a Movie title is being requested to be censored, remove said movie from all searches. If a book or a song/album is being censored, reciprocate for all mention of said title/song/album.

    Afterall, it is too hard to just censor the title from a specific site from a certain location. They should just remove it from all searches. That way, rights owners rights and web users are both protected from venturing into uncertain territory. No need to hassle about what appearing where.

    And if the MPAA or the other nut cases out there want to push it, well, remove them from the web as well.

  • Pingback: Industria de derechos de autor pide censurar motores de búsqueda | Tecnocápsulas

  • Pingback: renaissance chambara | Ged Carroll - Links of the day | ?????

  • Asd

    If they linked to sites where I could actually buy the damned stuff for a reasonable price in the first place, then I wouldn’t torrent it. If Googles top 10 results for a search result in “This content is not available in your country”, they’re going to lose a lot of marketshare.

  • w2a2aa

    I’m not a troll. I’m a small-guy publisher who is getting crushed by pirate and file-sharing sites. Within days of making something, which costs me money by the way to employ people and pay for facilities hire, it’s available free from many sources, and indexed by Google. Someone tell me what’s right about this?

    • Helixhamin5

      So, please tell me waaa, is your content available in Taiwan?
      If I try to buy your content, will I be stuck with Chinese websites, Chinese language material, or can I buy actual English titles?
      Are you going to ship it to me? Yes, we have English addresses, but do you deliver?
      How much more is it going to cost me for living in Taiwan compared to if I lived in the US?
      Will I be able to read it on my hand held devices, or will you be sticking some craptastic DRM on it so I cannot bring it to my other devices?

      These are the issues that turn those willing to buy your product into pirates of your material. As for those who pirate just because they can get it free, they will not purchase, so you aren’t loosing money off them. They would not have paid anyways. But, you may get other benefits, such as them telling a friend who is willing to pay for it about how good your material is. So, is the quality something that is worth it for people to pay?
      Are you actually giving the users a reason to pay?

    • Jason

      I’m not a troll.
      correction
      I’m a paid RIAA troll.

  • Gabriel Guzman

    I have an idea… how about the major search engines just remove all traces of any content produced by the people clamoring about piracy? Hey Universal… if you don’t want people to pirate your movies on the internet, no problem we’ll help you out… we’ll remove all the search results with any of your movies in them!

  • Pingback: Self-Lunar Deportation « LIBERTY IN EXILE

  • Pingback: At a behind-closed-doors meeting facilitated by the UK Department for Culture, Media… | Kalex's Tome

  • Pingback: Links – More censorship attacks, US Telcos try to knife TV Whitespace Baby | Techrights

  • Pingback: Copyright Industry Calls For Broad Search Engine Censorship | Shine Servers Blog

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Vivlian-Wozz/100003324676254 Vivlian Wozz

    I am a 27 years old doctor,mature and beautiful. and now i am seeking a good man who can give me real love, so i got a sername Andromeda2002 on Agedate.?òM, a nice and free place for younger women and older men,or older women and younger men, to interact with each other.Maybe you wanna check out or tell your friends.

  • Pingback: Terence Corcoran: The Grey's copyright wolves « Isohunt « Advertising Canada

  • Pingback: ????????????, ??? ??? ???? ????? ?? ACTA - ?????????? ?? ????????????

  • Pingback: UK: Copyright vultures seek search engine censorship-TorrentFreak « FACT – Freedom Against Censorship Thailand

  • Dmitri Bovski

    “behind-closed-doors meeting” this shit should be banned the government is for the people not for shady backroom dealing with foreign special interest groups.

  • AnonyMouse

    “Consumers rely on search engines to find and access entertainment content”

    No they don’t they rely on search engines to provide the information they are looking for (mainly not entertainment content If i wanted a DVD I would go to Amazon.) search engines rank things on what people want.

    Just like the MAFIAA’s secret way of detecting torrent users Search engine ranking systems are secret and proprietary.

  • Dmitri Bovski

    “Innovation in new digital content services is hampered by the fact that such sites have to compete against large numbers of unlicensed, free competitors”

    Damn I guess SourceForge.net is next on their list.

  • Miami Sunset

    I like the idea. The harder it is to find illegal material, the less likely it is that anyone will get sued over it. Illegal downloading shouldn’t be mainstream.

  • Pingback: Music Industry Mulls Suing Google Over “Pirate” Search Results | TorrentFreak

  • Pingback: Music Industry Mulls Suing Google Over “Pirate” Search Results | We R Pirates

  • Pingback: Music Industry Mulls Suing Google Over “Pirate” Search Results | Best Seedbox

  • Pingback: Music Industry Mulls Suing Google Over “Pirate” Search Results | Gizmodtech

  • Pingback: Music Industry Mulls Suing Google Over “Pirate” Search Results | Emmashare

  • Pingback: Music Industry Mulls Suing Google Over “Pirate” Search Results | Systema

  • Pingback: Possible lawsuit against Google over 'Pirate' search results - Limpt Inc. Blog Wim van Limpt

  • Pingback: Indústria fonográfica quer banir sites de compartilhamento nas buscas do Google

  • Guest

    I think IP holders should take lessons from video game companies that plant pirate killers in games… it’s funny and makes the point that if you think people don’t deserve to get paid for their tears, blood and sweat, then your game should get fragged, or boosted music plays a parody like UGNAZI’s latest piece of work, or movies play fast in reverse… Regarding legal file sharing, the industry needs to back off… but I think everything will become commoditized with digital technology keys… laugh now, cry later…

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • 404 Fail: Six Strikes’ Piracy Alternatives Go Missing

    After years of negotiating and planning the “six strikes” copyright alert system finally saw the light...

  • Google Doesn’t Believe Kim Dotcom is Real

    Those who enter Kim Dotcom into Google’s search box will get millions of results. Still, Google...

  • Nintendo’s Miyamoto: Piracy More Concerning Than Used Games Market

    In an interview with Computer and Video Games, Nintendo designer Shigeru Miyamoto says that his company...

  • Monitoring BitTorrent Activity on a Network Using WireShark

    As all readers should know by now, BitTorrent activity is public and can be easily logged...

  • The Pirate Bay Suffers Downtime

    The Pirate Bay is not responding at the moment and most proxies appear to be down...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.