“When someone points out this mistake with an obnoxiously complicated DMCA process, Big Search just says, “Ooops” and goes merrily on its way making more and more mistaken recommendations for law breaking.”

The point is, Google cannot filter copyrighted results out without this sort of thing happening. Here, DMCA notices were filed against HBO and against sites merely containing reviews of the show. And that was by a company HIRED BY HBO, not a third party search engine trying to index the entire Internet. If automatic filters were in place, would some of those review sites even know that they were mistakenly being censored? Would HBO file a lawsuit against Google for taking out their legitimate movie?

“This is why there’s an appeals process. This is why people are given SIX strikes. If mistakes are made, they can be corrected. (Other criminals only get THREE before getting a life sentence.)”

You don’t get life for shoplifting three times, or even six times. And from what I’ve seen, many providers won’t even let you appeal until you’re to the point of your account being suspended, you have to put up your own money to appeal, you don’t get to argue in actual court, and some won’t even let you use fair use as a defense.

“So man up. If you’re getting caught a few times, I think the odds of a mistake get smaller and smaller. If you do the crime, do the time.”

In case you didn’t see, HBO was accused 6 times above. Enough to get them kicked off the Internet. I wonder how HBO would take it if they were actually kicked off until they managed to schedule an appeal.

“So I say let’s give the artists and copyright holders the same leeway. We’re not asking for any more forgiveness, just the same flexibility that the billionaires at Big Search claim when they’re caught. “

It’s not the same, though.

Filing a DMCA notice means you are making a legal declaration. When they file these notices recklessly, it means innocent people are being censored. I would rather see a hundred infringing sites stay up than one legitimate site taken down.

Frankly, HBO should fire MarkMonitor, and the person who sent the notices should be investigated for possible perjury charges. A notice must contain “a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law. ” You cannot have a good faith belief if you don’t even look at what you’re signing.

“The copyright deniers love to point to a mistake here or there as a reason to just give up on all enforcement.”

Anything but. However, a point you’ll overlook/ignore, along with the stooge saying “bob is right”, is that mistakes like this show just how flawed and inaccurate their methods of identifying infringement are.

Which in turn has the negative effect of showing just how bad they’ll be at identifying people committing infringement. A point that is beyond valid and one worth mentioning repeatedly til certain people realize IP addresses DO NOT equal people, something the courts have ruled on.

In point of fact, you should be slapped on principle. Since it was YOU last time who said IP addresses are more foolproof and hold more evidentiary (I’m making that word up, so it has been spoken so it shall be) value than fingerprints or DNA. Yeah, read that again. You said that. I hope your mother isn’t alive to see you now, because otherwise she might have died of shame if she read that stupidity, written from the fingertips of something she gave birth to.

“Like a false rape conviction means we should stop prosecuting rape.”

Ugh no. It means that we need to better develop the methods through which we prosecute others for rape, as well as go about increasing the effectiveness of rape kit tests. In addition to do a more thorough job investigating a crime and suspected individual before we start convicting them.

You’re so stupid sometimes it hurts my head. Your analogies are terrible by the way. Copyright infringement. Rape. Yeah. Totally the same fucking thing. Or… you know, not.

“I say that the artists should get just as much forgiveness as Big Search.”

What you say has little merit given the history of your comments first off. Secondly, the artists aren’t the ones making the mistake here. It’s the people the copyright holders (HBO in this case, who are most definitely NOT “the artists”) are having file the DMCA notices on their behalf. Secondly, they shouldn’t get ANY forgiveness. Why? Because they give none. “Google SHOULD KNOW what is or isn’t infringing!” That’s the line you and others and the copyright holders tote out repeatedly. Yet, here we have evidence of the people they send out on their behalf obviously not fucking knowing what is or isn’t infringing. (THEY’RE FILING DMCA TAKEDOWNS AGAINST HBO’S OWN SITES FOR CHRIST SAKE!!!)

” Right now, Big Search makes millions of mistakes each day when it recommends illegally copied material to its customers.”

Absolutely and completely untrue, and pure opinion on your part. Google DOES NOT make millions by doing that. They do however make billions off of ad revenue generated from ads, which is their primary business.

Nor do they “recommend” anything to anyone. People use Google’s search to search for anything/everything. Google just indexes the web. Like a phone book. And returns search results as relevant to what was searched for. Nothing more, nothing less.

“When someone points out this mistake with an obnoxiously complicated DMCA process, Big Search just says, “Ooops” and goes merrily on its way making more and more mistaken recommendations for law breaking.”

I’ve commented in response to you before and listed the steps involved in filing a DMCA takedown through Google. “Obnoxiously complicated” is NOT at all what the process is. Unless you A. Can’t read B. Are a fucking idiot C. Don’t know anything about your own products or who you work for or on behalf of. It literally is 6 steps long. Gives you options to select from. It couldn’t be easier. Unless you just want a button placed on every single link and word and item on the web saying “infringing content”, with instructions to “CLICK THIS BUTTON TO IDENTIFY INFRINGING CONTENT” (which you’d need because you are obviously too stupid to follow step by step questions and make appropriate selections as given from a preset list).

“So I say let’s give the artists and copyright holders the same leeway.”

No. I say otherwise. Because if they’re going to accuse people of something, then the onus is on them to prove their in the right. If they can’t get their own act together they have no right to demand the same of others. That’s how things work in society. Before you wag your finger you better make sure someone can’t wag theirs at you.

“We’re not asking for any more forgiveness, just the same flexibility that the billionaires at Big Search claim when they’re caught.”

Actually, you just asked for forgiveness. And again, with the Google bit. Google DOES NOTHING WRONG. They index the web. That’s it. What’s put out there they have no control over. Get that through your goddamn skull.

“I wish the system were perfect, but it’s better than almost every other form of enforcement.”

Mhm. This is the part where I ask if your mother routinely abused alcohol or drugs while pregnant with you. Did she? Because only an idiot thinks this is better than literally almost every other form of enforcement around. So this is better than gathering evidence in the form of DNA or fingerprints (which are unique to every single person)? God, I hate you.

“There are people serving life sentences based upon a single eye witness.”

True. But as any good prosecutor will tell you, evidence you can see, hold or feel is a thousand times better than any witness. Because witnesses can be wrong.

“Well, this is certainly better than that.”

Wow. You just compared this to witnesses putting innocent people in prison. So you’ve literally just barely stepped over the “bob thresh hold for approval”. Tard.

This isn’t better than that. This is the equivalent. If not worse.

“This is why there’s an appeals process.”

If by appeals process you mean, “pay to appeal the strike, but you’re only allowed the defenses we allow you to use” then I guess that’s an appeals process. Definitely a joke of one. That’s not an appeals process though, not by any legal stretch of the definition.

“This is why people are given SIX strikes. If mistakes are made, they can be corrected.”

Uh, no. Those “mistakes” actually CAN’T be “corrected”. See previous reply to your other sentence.

“(Other criminals only get THREE before getting a life sentence.)”

Yes, but they also GET any of a plethora of defenses, in addition to which their convictions must be BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. Which IP addresses are not.

“So man up. If you’re getting caught a few times, I think the odds of a mistake get smaller and smaller. If you do the crime, do the time.”

Copyright infringement, except on a commercial scale, is NOT a crime. At least not one punishable by jail time. So it’s not the equivalent of real crime, and definitely not worth of saying that stupid line you used to close your stupidity with.

Okay, but running with that. Since HBO up above has 6 (SIX) marks against it, HBO is no longer allowed access to the internet. Sounds fair, right? I mean you’re arguing for six strikes against some, why not against others? Either the rules apply to all or they apply to none. You can’t mix and match as suits you or your biased outlook.

May I make a suggestion? Go castrate yourself. For the good of mankind, you shouldn’t be allowed to even attempt to procreate. Lest you (further) pollute the gene pool.