Google vows to fight antipiracy bill even if passed

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20063963-261.html

by urbannomad • 15 years ago

169 46 15 years ago

news.cnet.com

MaxGabriel• 15 years ago

Ugh.. This article barely mentions the critics of IP. They get mentioned at the very end of the article as "those who believe in the free flow of information, and critics of Protect IP." Meanwhile, the article throws around unsourced 'billions of dollars and thousands of jobs' claims about just how awful it is that intellectual property is violated.

I don't know what motive Google has for fighting it, but I'm glad they are nonetheless

kwantam• 15 years ago

The motive for fighting it is that by crossing the line from "robotic indexer of the web" to "provider of curated search data", Google assumes substantial responsibility for the content of websites outside their control. This is a nightmarish slippery slope situation for them.

In my mind, making a person who provides a hyperlink responsible for the content of that link is just insanely wrongheaded and bespeaks a deep misunderstanding of the nature of the web.

bediger• 15 years ago

Placing the liability for a link on the linker is more than just misunderstanding the nature of the web, it flies in the face of lots of other American principles.

People commit serious crimes with all kinds of things, screwdrivers and wire ties, let's say. Do we penalize the screwdriver maker when some crazoid kills an innocent and beautiful child with a screwdriver? No. In fact, we've just recently had the Supreme Court tell us that Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

This law is tantamount to a hitman asking directions to a street address from some passer-by, and then making the passer-by legally a murderer.

This law doesn't make sense.

jerf2• 15 years ago

"This is a nightmarish slippery slope situation for them."

Stronger: This is an existential crisis for them. For as rich as they appear to be and for all the resources they seem to have, the task of curating the web is still an order of magnitude or two larger at least, and for certain strict interpretations of the law, this would simply crush them. And there is no chance that any politician will look at Google and see this, because all the numbers are above the "1, 2, ..., many" threshold for most humans, and the idea that the task is too large for Google will be poo-pooed by politicians if you simply make that engineering argument.

jbooth• 15 years ago

Most of the critics don't have PR guys.

iwwr3• 15 years ago

Vested interests at work. They have an economy of scale in the political realm. More often than not, laws are drafted by the lobbyists themselves.

wccrawford• 15 years ago

"Google seems to think it's above America's laws."

... No, it seems to think that particular law is unjust, and as responsible citizens, they are duty-bound to fight it.

joshes• 15 years ago

Exactly.

Leave it to an executive of the MAFIAA (Michael O'Leary) to contort basic civic principles to slander anyone who stands up against their ridiculous, rights-trouncing mode of operation.

Ruudjah2• 15 years ago

You beat me. That quote striked me, too.

I'm not sure if it's doublespeak or logic. Is the MPAA above America's laws when it pays congressman to vote for specific law proposals? Or is it logic that no one should be above the law, even if law is paid for by certain industries?

powertower3• 15 years ago

Things are not that clear.

Do you know what the revenue sources are for a lot of the pirate movie websites?

Google AdSense.

And for software...

From what I've seen, Google often displays crack sites on the first search page for software. 1st place result for author, 2nd,3rd,4th,5th,6th,7th result for crack sites.

In my own testing, I've found that at least 30% of buyers search for crack 1st, and when they can't find it, then they buy.

Google does this for two reasons:

1. There is significant revenue involved here. 2. There is significant relevancy involved here. As people gladly want to use pirated stuff to get out of paying, and want to see these results.

Google is not fighting for you. They are fighting for themselves.

smokeyj3• 15 years ago

Google's revenue from pirated movies and software is virtually non-existent. Their real interest is Youtube, considering half it's content probably infringes copyright somewhere.

mtogo• 15 years ago

http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better...

rickmb• 15 years ago

Responsible citizens my ass.

Google does what is in Google's interests. Remember how Google vowed to fight for Net Neutrality until it became against their business interests in the mobile arena?

Google is "duty-bound" only to its shareholders. All the copyright-mafia needs to do is to find a way in which it becomes in Google's best interest to not fight that law, and they will change their "ethical" stance faster than you can say "u-turn".

ltamake• 15 years ago

Probably a PR stunt, but I'm still happy they're going to fight it.

Ruudjah2• 15 years ago

Google does not need that kind of PR.

iwwr3• 15 years ago

For hackerdom at least, it's good PR. Consider Sony's case, they might have shut out a large number of talented people by the way they handled the PS3 hacking affair.

mrschwabe• 15 years ago

My thoughts exactly. This seems like a preemptive PR tactic by Google. Think about it. If this is bill is ultimately passed, then Google is playing it smart by taking this stance now -- to help them look more innocent later - when they inevitably roll over and comply with the US gov't.

iwwr3• 15 years ago

"Copyright owners have said the legislation has a series of legal checks and balances built in and would be geared only toward pirate sites."

Any information on what these 'checks and balances' would be?

yason• 15 years ago

Those can be found in the banks and bank accounts of each potential infringer, presumably.

skymt• 15 years ago

You can read the full text of the bill here: http://www.publicknowledge.org/files/docs/Bill-PROTECT-IP-Ac...

Checks and balances are in section 3 (f), which describes how to file a motion to "modify, suspend or vacate" an order if the site removes the offending content or the order turns out to be in error.

jbri• 15 years ago

It's not a proper balance unless it has provisions to dissuade those who misuse the process. "Lol our bad" and putting it back up, with no compensation for that downtime or penalty for false accusations doesn't actually do anything.

shareme• 15 years ago

hint MPAA if people do not have money to pay for it is not lost job in the millions...it just millions you will never see..ever

fleitz• 15 years ago

They said this crap about warrantless wiretapping. It won't be used against pirate sites it will be used against sites that express a POV contrary to the administration. Wikileaks is not a 'pirate' site.

When the government asks for something you should not consider how they want to use it, you should consider how they want to abuse the power. The case they trot out is specious and could usually be dealt with via much better ways via existing law.

If these file sharing sites are conducting criminal activities then they should be taken to court and tried according to the laws of the country in which the site operates.

As far as being above America's laws, I think Google's position is clearly within a plain reading of the constitution.

petar• 15 years ago

My take on this:

  http://popalg.org/schmidt-response

chris112• 15 years ago

While I agree that this legislation will be ineffective in fighting piracy, I don't think Google is concerned about the effects of piracy. This would seriously threaten any site that deals with legally questionable material. Instead of dealing with a DMCA notice, now they are threatening with the loss of their site. And it's not like you have to try to infringe when dealing with user submitted content. In the Google vs Viacom lawsuits, the Viacom legal team brought up videos submitted by Viacom Marketing employees as evidence of infringement.

randomwalker• 15 years ago

Today I got to talk to Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, one of the very few legislators who is fighting this. Here are my notes: http://33bits.org/2011/05/19/fighting-protect-ip-congresswom... There were some surprises for me. Here is the summary:

Appeals to free speech and chilling effects are at best temporary measures in the fight against Protect IP and domain seizures. Even if we win this time it will keep coming back in modified form; the only way defeat it for good is to convince Washington that artists are in fact thriving, that piracy is not the real problem, and that takedown efforts are not in the interest of society. We in the tech world know this, but we are doing a poor job of making ourselves heard in Washington, and this needs to change.

CamperBob• 15 years ago

It would be even better if we could convince the MPAA and RIAA of this.

They're the same people, after all -- look at the composition of the Obama DOJ if you don't believe me.

smokeyj3• 15 years ago

They would consider not infringing on free speech if artists are thriving? Good to know where my rights fit on their scale.

bluedanieru• 15 years ago

Even that's not enough. He's assuming most people in Congress and the Obama administration give a damn about the effects of piracy on artistic expression, or indeed what is in the best interests of society. They don't. It's sad to see someone so naive in that position.

skrebbel• 15 years ago

don't confuse naivety with pr: she's talking on record there.

barring a few nutjobs, i've the idea most politicians are significantly less naive than they let show.

DanielBMarkham• 15 years ago

If the message to legislators is: won't you please do something to protect all those poor and starving artists? Then we are well and truly hosed.

More likely: big money bought the bill and the "starving artist" facade is a convenient and facile deceit. Like all good bought laws, it works loosely on a philosophical scale, has emotional appeal, and is difficult to argue without getting into the weeds of changing business models, the way the internet works, etc.

I'm a big fan of politics (micro and macro) and philosophy, mainly because I love studying how people make group decisions. Over the past couple of years I've become more and more convinced that humanity has entered a time where things are changing so fast that the average guy isn't fully aware of how he's getting screwed over. The only saving grace is that older people can see the changes more clearly. With transhumanism on the way, Google and others creating the Borg in the cloud, and governments snooping into every little thing we do, it's almost like the previous 2500 years we have been studying very hard at how freedom and virtue inter-relate, and now comes the test.

Sure hope we do well.

Google vows to fight antipiracy bill even if passed

Related Stories