Comments on: WWE Asked Google to Hit Live Piracy…From the Future

By: Robert Littler

Robert Littler — Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:27:00 +0000

Nah, the anti-piracy companies bought the secrets of time travel and the reality distortion field from Steve Jobbs before he died.

By: Links 18/8/2014: Linux 3.17 RC1, Escalation in Ferguson | Techrights

Links 18/8/2014: Linux 3.17 RC1, Escalation in Ferguson | Techrights — Mon, 18 Aug 2014 11:48:28 +0000

[…] WWE Asked Google to Hit Live Piracy…From the Future […]

By: LiamBob

LiamBob — Mon, 18 Aug 2014 04:22:00 +0000

You can be a prince or pauper, an artist or an average person. But if you choose to abuse the privileges you are given and insist on having people do the work for you while throwing a hissy, fussy tantrum, don’t expect to be rewarded for your petulance.

By: ungenannt

ungenannt — Mon, 18 Aug 2014 04:03:00 +0000

There really needs to be federal legislation to protects companies from frivolous take down requests. Too many take downs are automated. If the take down is in err the company who issued the take down should pay no less then $1000 to the company which requested to take down the infringing material and $10,000 to the company it falsely accused.

This will stop automated take downs in its tracks.

By: Dave Cox

Dave Cox — Mon, 18 Aug 2014 01:07:00 +0000

LiquidVPN publishes all of the incoming DMCA reports on our website. Recently we have begun getting DMCA requests by our webservers ISP, Google and Twitter with links back to the original DMCA report as the copyright material. We answer each one and they are usually dropped. This whole thing is becoming a huge joke.

By: monkeyslap

monkeyslap — Mon, 18 Aug 2014 00:05:00 +0000

It’s bad enough they completely bypass any due process and right to a fair trial by having courts force ISPs to block certain websites that “infringe copyright”.

Now these copyright assclowns are going straight into thought control: predicting that a crime will take place and attempting to have those who will commit the crime punished before the crime even takes place.

Reminds me of the Tom Cruise movie “Minority Report”. (Good film IMO)

By: Steve GraphiX

Steve GraphiX — Sun, 17 Aug 2014 22:44:00 +0000

Dear google, can you remove the links for my movie please, i’m not going to tell you the name of the movie, where it actually is located, simply because i’ve not made it yet .. but i will be releasing it in about 10 years time from now.

So can you please make sure it’s removed now thank you.

Every day it gets more and more weird what these people think they can do.
Starting to ask the question are they actually of human origin?

By: Guest(pure)

Guest(pure) — Sun, 17 Aug 2014 21:23:00 +0000

I can now forsee the likes of Lionsgate and others that are part of the MAFIAA to send DMCA notices to Google, torrent sites, and other hosting providers way before the actual release of their movie and then when a leak happens before the release of the movie and starts showing up in Google indexes, torrent sites and file hosting companies or even showing up in such sites after the release of the movie then sue Google, torrent sites and hosting providers for failing to act on the DMCA because they didn’t block access to the movie that was listed in the DMCA notice. The DMCA notice would be a false notice as it requires infringment to actually have taken place to issue the DMCA and if infringement hasn’t taken place then its not infringement.

By: fitt-a-matic

fitt-a-matic — Sun, 17 Aug 2014 21:04:00 +0000

Next part: DMCA warnings for future albums or movies. Expect it

By: Richard Uie

Richard Uie — Sun, 17 Aug 2014 20:09:00 +0000

Google, in its search engine role, provides an automated, web-spidering and indexing service. To have some non-Google party place the onus for protecting its IP on Google before the fact is possibly sociopathically insane (as in “my capacity coercively to derive maximal income outweighs all other interests of everyone everywhere – make it so, Google”) but certainly illegal in the U.S.

This is back to the “don’t let that guy talk, ‘cuz he’s gonna offend me” school of censorship. We may debate even whether the restriction of the speech is valid after the fact of its expression, but, UNTIL IT EXISTS, the “a priori” assumption that it should be suppressed is illegal (and damned scary).

Until a specific URL exists that provides a link to specific content, there is no violation. Until there is a violation, there is no legal basis per DMCA to call on Google to “do something.” That these ultra-maroons believe otherwise and are willing to say so in public can hopefully be spun to convince the wider public just how evilly, greedily self-centered the copyright industry has become. Eventually, we will find that last straw to break the camel’s back.