Page 1 of 2
#1
I don't know if any of you have noticed, or if it's been discussed here already, but Google is now omitting search results not based on duplicity but based on whether they may infringe on US copyrights.

From the bottom of my search page:

In response to a complaint we received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaint that caused the removal(s) at ChillingEffects.org.

Is this new or something? I'd never seen it until last night. If there's already a thread on this, feel free to point and laugh.
#2
...wut.

Screencaps?
Gibson Les Paul Studio
Yamaha Pacifica 112
Alvarez SLM
Orange Dark Terror
Orange PPC212OB 2x12 cab
Yamaha P-85 Keyboard
#3
It's been doing this for ages bro.

EDIT: I just checked my join date on a site which I 'think' has always had the chillingeffects.org complaint thing on the Google results, and that's from 2008. I'm pretty sure the chillingeffects.org thing has been there since I joined that site.
Last edited by devourke at Oct 5, 2011,
#4
I remember seeing something like this a long time ago.
Quote by SomeoneYouKnew
Your post was the only bright spot in this disgusting piece of thread.

Quote by lexanirider78
You have balls. I like balls....(awkward silence)

Quote by SeveralSpecies
I waited for the rape.

...


...but the rape never came
#6
Meh

They're blocking things that infringe upon copyrights. I see nothing wrong.
Quote by UntilISleep
You have excellent taste in literature, dear sir

Quote by Primus2112
You have excellent taste in video games, good sir.

Quote by GbAdimDb5m7
You have terrible taste in signatures, idiotic sir.

kkoo
#8
Quote by █▐▌█▐▌
**** you RICH KID.




Growing up perfectly middle class, I lold hard at your sentiment.
Quote by denizenz
I'll logic you right in the thyroid.

Art & Lutherie
#9
Google isn't censoring the internet, you just made a misleading title, just like UG!

They're only censoring their search.
#10
Quote by █▐▌█▐▌
**** you RICH KID.



That makes no sense
Quote by UntilISleep
You have excellent taste in literature, dear sir

Quote by Primus2112
You have excellent taste in video games, good sir.

Quote by GbAdimDb5m7
You have terrible taste in signatures, idiotic sir.

kkoo
#11
See, here's the thing. If it's infringing copyrights, it technically is illegal. Regardless of your thoughts, law is law. Go ahead and push for change, but you don't get change by wantonly breaking the law because you don't like it.

Hosting links to illegal things, especially in the same search used to get the legal version, is not good at all for a company, and could be the beginning of a very possible lawsuit against Google if I'm not mistaken. Being sued isn't good at all, either.
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 50-54
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 0-0
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 0-0
Last edited by necrosis1193 at Oct 5, 2011,
#12
Quote by Zeletros
Google isn't censoring the internet, you just made a misleading title, just like UG!

They're only censoring their search.


You read UG articles?
2013 #5 Uger
2012 #7 Uger

Quote by jetfuel495
Jesus, Horsedick, you are my hero

Quote by JayT44
don't worry guys his girlfriend is black, she said it was okay for him to say that.



Stalk Me

Shitty Covers

Original Music

Lastfm
#13
Quote by Horsedick.MPEG
You read UG articles?



I read the title and few of the comments
#14
Quote by necrosis1193

Hosting links to illegal things, especially in the same search used to get the legal version, is not good at all for a company, and could be the beginning of a very possible lawsuit against Google if I'm not mistaken. Being sued isn't good at all, either.


They don't really host links to illegal things themselves though. They're just a way to find sites that do. Unless you're counting caches of illegal sites, and I hardly think that would stand.
#15
illegal downloading basically confirms what we already knew for ages. ring of gyges. etc, etc.
#DTWD
#16
Quote by Zeletros
Google isn't censoring the internet, you just made a misleading title, just like UG!

They're only censoring their search.

I guess that explains how I got the job.
Quote by necrosis1193
See, here's the thing. If it's infringing copyrights, it technically is illegal. Regardless of your thoughts, law is law. Go ahead and push for change, but you don't get change by wantonly breaking the law because you don't like it.

Hosting links to illegal things, especially in the same search used to get the legal version, is not good at all for a company, and could be the beginning of a very possible lawsuit against Google if I'm not mistaken. Being sued isn't good at all, either.

See, I can understand this, but I doubt that Google censors searches evenly across all countries.

For instance, any country to officially adopt Net Neutrality probably doesn't have any restricted searches. Google does it to cover their own ass, so where they can't be busted (overseas) they probably don't care.

And I see Google as more of a road that takes you places, you decide where you want to go. Google doesn't host anything illegal itself, it just points you to the guys that do.
#17
Quote by jetfuel495

For instance, any country to officially adopt Net Neutrality probably doesn't have any restricted searches. Google does it to cover their own ass, so where they can't be busted (overseas) they probably don't care.


Well the chillingeffects.org affects me and I live in New Zealand, so I'm going to assume that they do it globally because New Zealand has barely any Internet laws.
#19
Quote by necrosis1193
See, here's the thing. If it's infringing copyrights, it technically is illegal. Regardless of your thoughts, law is law. Go ahead and push for change, but you don't get change by wantonly breaking the law because you don't like it.

Hosting links to illegal things, especially in the same search used to get the legal version, is not good at all for a company, and could be the beginning of a very possible lawsuit against Google if I'm not mistaken. Being sued isn't good at all, either.

It's funny because Google engages in illegal business practices.
#20
Quote by jetfuel495
I guess that explains how I got the job.
See, I can understand this, but I doubt that Google censors searches evenly across all countries.

For instance, any country to officially adopt Net Neutrality probably doesn't have any restricted searches. Google does it to cover their own ass, so where they can't be busted (overseas) they probably don't care.

And I see Google as more of a road that takes you places, you decide where you want to go. Google doesn't host anything illegal itself, it just points you to the guys that do.



And Piratebay doesn't host anything illegal itself, it simply allows people to share their "personal" files with others, the site just provides the means to do so.

Which I greatly support.
#24
Quote by jetfuel495
I guess that explains how I got the job.
See, I can understand this, but I doubt that Google censors searches evenly across all countries.

For instance, any country to officially adopt Net Neutrality probably doesn't have any restricted searches. Google does it to cover their own ass, so where they can't be busted (overseas) they probably don't care.


I never denied that. They probably are - they want to give unrestricted searches over the entire internet, it'd mean a little more ad revenue, and more people searching. The less restriction, the better for them.

But it's in their best interest to remove a few results in some countries than risk a lawsuit that'd be a huge PR blow, a potential loss of millions(People don't sue giants for small amounts. If you're poor, you'll never get sued because nobody can get anything from you. But remember the McDonalds coffee suit, when people beat corporations in court, they get millions. I think at least 3 million in 90's money from that one), and hundreds of money-grubbers combing their pages looking for an infraction so they can get in on the action. After all, one multi-million dollar lawsuit won't close something like Google out.

Optimally, they don't want to filter anything. But they do for their safety. It's not a case of censorship so much as, as you put it much more simply than I have, covering their ass, and with good reason.

And I see Google as more of a road that takes you places, you decide where you want to go. Google doesn't host anything illegal itself, it just points you to the guys that do.


Yes, but the question isn't what you think. The question is what can the prosecutor sell the jury on?
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 50-54
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 0-0
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 0-0
#25
Quote by Avedas
But it's Google. They are above the law.



I don't really see a problem with them "putting their products on top", it's their own search, they can do what they want to.
#26
Quote by Dirge Humani
But google also advertises to you based on what you search and where you go from google, so they could potentially start advertising you illegal things.


If there are illegal ads being used by Google, you can report them and Google will remove them. Google does not condone illegal activities, and they can choose who to deny advertising rights.

Quote by due 07


I don't even see anything wrong with Google favouring it's own services over others. Even thought it's just alleged that they do.
#27
Quote by Zeletros
I don't really see a problem with them "putting their products on top", it's their own search, they can do what they want to.


Well, I think so too. Google Ads are everywhere, anyway.
#28
Quote by Dirge Humani
Allegedly.

I like to use the AllJudasPriest model of "You're guilty and have to prove your innocence. End of."
#29
Quote by due 07
I like to use the AllJudasPriest model of "You're guilty and have to prove your innocence. End of."


Quiet, Edgey.

Cookie for reference.
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 50-54
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 0-0
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 0-0
#30
Quote by Avedas
Well, I think so too. Google Ads are everywhere, anyway.



I've yet to see a google ad. And I use several of their services, I'd say many other companies are doing much worse.
#31
Quote by devourke
I don't even see anything wrong with Google favouring it's own services over others. Even thought it's just alleged that they do.

I believe the problem is that it creates a near-monopoly type situation due to Google's unique, significant place in the market.
Quote by spitonastranger
Al Jazeera? Why are you linking me to this terrorist shit!?

I went to my dad and stepmom's church for some reason or another. At the potluck, I said I wanted to be a cyberjournalist for Al Jazeera. My stepmom got all pissed and sternly said , "Zach! Don't even joke about that here. " To this day, I don't have a fucking clue what I said wrong.
Last edited by due 07 at Oct 5, 2011,
#32
Quote by Zeletros
I've yet to see a google ad. And I use several of their services, I'd say many other companies are doing much worse.


If you use adblock they won't show up. I think Chrome even lets you disable them but not sure about that.
#33
Quote by Avedas
If you use adblock they won't show up. I think Chrome even lets you disable them but not sure about that.

Don't think Chrome lets you. At least I can't find the setting if it's there.

And I'm still confused at rectangle rectangle rectangle rectangle's comment D:
Quote by UntilISleep
You have excellent taste in literature, dear sir

Quote by Primus2112
You have excellent taste in video games, good sir.

Quote by GbAdimDb5m7
You have terrible taste in signatures, idiotic sir.

kkoo
#35
Quote by due 07
I believe the problem is that it creates a near-monopoly type situation due to Google's unique, significant place in the market.


Google is a unique company though. The only Google product I've ever been disappointed with has been Google Docs, and only because it's sort of slow (But that's mostly the fault of my Laptop and Internet) and to be honest I use that pretty much every day. I wouldn't really mind a Google monopoly personally, they release quality shit.

Quote by mulefish


9 Minutes brah. I'm way too ADD for that shit.
Last edited by devourke at Oct 5, 2011,
#36
Quote by izbbass
Don't think Chrome lets you. At least I can't find the setting if it's there.


Yeah, never mind it's an adblock option. But pretty much everyone runs adblock these days.

Quote by devourke
Google is a unique company though. The only Google product I've ever been disappointed with has been Google Docs, and only because it's sort of slow (But that's mostly the fault of my Laptop and Internet) and to be honest I use that pretty much every day. I wouldn't really mind a Google monopoly personally, they release quality shit.


This is my take on it as well. Google taking over everything is never really bad. Their successes far outweigh their shortcomings. Docs is a pain in the ass, but the idea is good.
#37
Quote by devourke
Google is a unique company though. The only Google product I've ever been disappointed with has been Google Docs, and only because it's sort of slow (But that's mostly the fault of my Laptop and Internet) and to be honest I use that pretty much every day. I wouldn't really mind a Google monopoly personally, they release quality shit.

The rest of the economy minds if Google has a monopoly on everything, though.
#38
Quote by darkstar2466


Growing up perfectly middle class, I lold hard at your sentiment.


I was about to google urmomistan as I thought it was an obscure place in middle-earth
#39
Quote by spitonastranger
Al Jazeera? Why are you linking me to this terrorist shit!?
Because it's a much better news source than Fox
Quote by necrosis1193
I never denied that. They probably are - they want to give unrestricted searches over the entire internet, it'd mean a little more ad revenue, and more people searching. The less restriction, the better for them.

But it's in their best interest to remove a few results in some countries than risk a lawsuit that'd be a huge PR blow, a potential loss of millions(People don't sue giants for small amounts. If you're poor, you'll never get sued because nobody can get anything from you. But remember the McDonalds coffee suit, when people beat corporations in court, they get millions. I think at least 3 million in 90's money from that one), and hundreds of money-grubbers combing their pages looking for an infraction so they can get in on the action. After all, one multi-million dollar lawsuit won't close something like Google out.

Optimally, they don't want to filter anything. But they do for their safety. It's not a case of censorship so much as, as you put it much more simply than I have, covering their ass, and with good reason.


Yes, but the question isn't what you think. The question is what can the prosecutor sell the jury on?
I just can't wrap my head around how you can sue a search engine for searching.

If anything, people will find other means to get what they're looking for.
#40
Quote by due 07
I went to my dad and stepmom's church for some reason or another. At the potluck, I said I wanted to be a cyberjournalist for Al Jazeera. My stepmom got all pissed and sternly said , "Zach! Don't even joke about that here. " To this day, I don't have a fucking clue what I said wrong.


Yeah i know that 'only atheist at the service' feel, bro. I love how biased people are against it. One of those things some smart ass blogger would survey a red state on their feelings towards a la "is barack obama a muslim?"
Page 1 of 2