Google Slammed For Supporting Piracy

Leading musicians have signed an open letter asking for better enforcement against music piracy, but Google says it already removes millions of links every month.

Google Slammed For Supporting Piracy
0
UK musicians have slammed Google and other search engines for helping aid piracy in an open letter to Prime Minister David Cameron this week. The group calling for more action to battle music piracy include Queen guitarist Brian May, Led Zeppelin singer Robert Plant and members of The Who. The letter says search engines and broadband companies "must play their part in protecting consumers and creators from illegal sites." It calls on David Cameron to implement and enforce measures set out in 2010, which includes cutting off internet access to those who illegally download music. The measures are currently set to come into force in 2014. Google has recently been targeted by the music industry for making it too easy to find illegal file sharing sites, but the search engine claims it already removes millions of links every month. Speaking last week, BPI leader Geoff Taylor said: "Once we've told Google 100,000 times that a particular site is illegal, we don't think that site should be coming above iTunes and Spotify in the results." Google responded by saying it should not be responsible for deciding what sites are acting legally, and insist it would be more effective to remove advertising opportunities for the sites that host illegal content. What do you think? Could Google do more to block piracy? Share your opinion in the comments.

90 comments sorted by best / new / date

comments policy
    Doctor.Dolittle
    There's nothing you can do about it, guys. There will always be some sort of page for downloading illegal music. It's the internet, and you can't control every aspect of it. I'm sorry, but they are just the facts.
    spiff-corgi
    The group calling for more action to battle music piracy include Queen guitarist Brian May
    Brian, you have nothing to worry about. Your single with Dappy will not be downloaded by anybody, illegally or not.
    iommi600
    Actually, Google removes all the illegal downloading from the search results if they get a notice from the labels or anything. Besides, it's not Google's fault that people use it to find stuff for free... Come on.
    thes50
    I like how these people think that by writting a letter they're going to stop Piracy. The internet is pretty much uncontrollable. You will block one method and ten more will open up. Deal with it musicians & record labels. Nothing is going to change soon.
    spiff-corgi
    Also, WHAT THE HELL? So people think that because a link is available on google loads of people will suddenly start using it even if they don't know what it is. If people use that site, or want to find it, they will. Google knows there is no point banning websites from its database and that it will stump its credibility if it starts bowing to the pressure of record company execs hungry for as much money as they can get their grubby paws on. Because that's what this is. It's not independent musicians who are being done over by piracy, it's the guys in suits sitting in air-condition offices. Fuck the police.
    stonedhippos
    crazysam23_Atax wrote on 07/25/2012 - 11:59 am Bullshit! The search engines and ISPs should not be required to shit.
    they are going to get a very nasty case of constipation if they were no longer took shits.
    Downloading music should NOT be illegal. Music should be the property of everyone and therefore free to all.
    tell that to the people who make music for a living and are barely getting by.
    Kueller917
    crazysam23_Atax wrote: Downloading music should NOT be illegal. Music should be the property of everyone and therefore free to all.
    Think of it as a service. The music technically is free to all. You can sing it on the street, cover it live, whatever without having to pay someone every time. But when getting a recorded song you're paying for the recording process, the distribution, the formatting, and maybe the touring to hear these songs later.
    DickHardwood
    These sites get enough traffic by word of mouth alone. Google can remove every one of them, people will still be able to get around. That being said, if you google the pirate bay the torrent site is the first to pop up so Google doesn't really do shit either.
    Vinushka
    Old men thinking they can stop the internet. Might as well try to drink the ocean for all the good it will do. The internet should be a free forum, for good or bad and results should not be blocked by search engines or ISPs. Doing so simply shows how deep in the pockets of the coporations they are. The internet is the last bastion of free speech and even that is starting to fail. People being arrested for racist tweets or trolling schoolmates. While I do not support these activities people should be allowed to express themselves regardless of stupidity or bigotry.
    ljpfahey
    Idiots. When it comes to censorship it's all or nothing. You can't allow search engines to censor the online world. They are not the police and they should not be ruled by the police. Google are doing nothing wrong here. This is the work of Warner Bros and other such companies. They're the people who didn't want you recording their movies on VHS and sharing it with your childhood friends. They're the people who didn't want you making mix tapes for your girlfriends. OK, maybe not girlfriends. This is UG afterall, but you get my point!
    ljpfahey
    Once weve told Google 100,000 times that a particular site is illegal, we dont think that site should be coming above iTunes and Spotify in the results.
    ^Idiots. They don't seem to understand how google works.
    StephenVaughn
    I know this is an old argument but, Queen, The Who, and Led Zepplin, Don't need anymore money. And it's not like any of them are releasing new albums that will be pirated. Don't download struggling new bands, but these guys? I'm all for it.
    nnb
    I agree its not googles responsibility to police torrent sites, especially days after the ban on the pirate bay failed announcement. The musical landscape has changed, I'm sure we won't be downloading massive amounts of music, movie, books ect forever but the music industry won't be returning to the way it was before either. With that said, I hate it when well established artists are the ones doing most of the complaining or even worse when its corporate executive who essentially only care about the image and style appeals to the lowest common dominator so they can sell more. Now someone thinking music should be free, that has to be one of the dumbest things I've read.
    kojoto
    We live in a ****ed up generation that has lost all morals.
    Said every previous generation to the next.
    mysticguitar77
    Okay, fine, I'll just use Yahoo then. It's not going to make any difference at all if Google shows piracy sites or not in their searches. If people want to get music for free as long as the internet exists, there will always be a means and a way to do so. The only way for piracy to be completely stopped is if they have a total blackout of the internet to EVERYONE. It's the only way to stop it at least almost completely which will never EVER happen, but this is what these delusional people want to happen because they are too greedy to realize that it's never to work.
    donstr888
    Music should not be free to anyone, unless the musician says otherwise. These musicians work hard to get where they are now and you people are taking them for granted.
    Downloading music should NOT be illegal. Music should be the property of everyone and therefore free to all.
    It's people like this that are wrong with the world. You think just because musicians make more money than you, you can take money from them by stealing their music. You can't steal no matter what the circumstance. We live in a ****ed up generation that has lost all morals.
    Iommianity
    It's not the good ol' times anymore where you had these 5 or 6 popular bands and that was it.
    The hell does this even mean? Which times were these?
    stonedhippos
    azianmusician19 wrote: UG sure likes to use "slam" a lot in their headlines...
    it's because it has a powerful connotation to it. if they said "nudged", it wouldn't have the same effect.
    Covet
    Wait, a bunch of rich old men are calling for stricter anti-piracy measures? I'm shocked.
    maltore
    LOOOOOL Robert Plant to protect musical integrity. I loled. No other man has stolen more lyrics from others without paying respects to the original songwriters, EVER!!
    TheExterminator
    leohimself wrote: tape trading = file sharing.
    And people bitched about that when it was the big thing. Home taping is killing the music industry, blah blah blah blah! You wouldn't tape a car! All it did was help fringe genres like Metal and Punk to expand beyond what they normally could if they had followed legal routes, because those legal routes were still mass-producing crappy Glam bands to make MOARMONEY.
    Kevin19
    crazysam23_Atax wrote: The search engines and ISPs should not be required to shit.
    This is debatable.
    crazysam23_Atax wrote: Downloading music should NOT be illegal. Music should be the property of everyone and therefore free to all.
    This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.
    leohimself
    Omg these rich people complaining again because they can't get even more rich... I'm sick of all this.
    -shaikh-
    Wouldn't blaming google for piracy be like blaming car manufacturers in aiding criminals escape from crime scenes? It's a bit irrelevant.
    Pit_
    Horse shit! You should also ask the mobile phone companies to disallow calls towards prostitutes while your at it.
    mradubz33
    The letter says search engines and broadband companies "must play their part in protecting consumers and creators from illegal sites."
    Please protect us Google!! If Google doesn't protect us consumers, who will?!?
    ali.guitarkid7
    Personally don't care whether or not Google blocks pirating sites from its results, I don't need Google to find it; I don't think it makes for a "free" internet though and maybe we just shouldn't give a shit about something as ****ing trivial as this?
    the_white_bunny
    Koelker12 wrote: Why is it Google's job to enforce the internet? Oh, that's right. It's not.
    this sums it up. google=/=the internet.
    Koelker12
    Why is it Google's job to enforce the internet? Oh, that's right. It's not.
    intheshadowplay
    The irony in Robert Plant bitching about people stealing songs is almost fatal. Led ****ing Zeppelin stole more black music than you can shake a stick out. Stay classy, Plant.
    splogaton
    Google is just a search engine, its too much work for them to remove every single link that goes to a website to download pirated content
    C0FF1NCAS3
    The morality of file sharing aside, how do you justify censoring information or the ristriction of personal liberty? Forcing Google and ISPs to censor websites is a lot like saying its illegal to steal, so its ok chain me to a radiator to prvent me from ever stealing any thing. Granted the "freedom" of the neutral net is going to be over in the next 25 years the fact we made it this long baffles me but I definately think its worth fighting for keeping the level of freedom we currently have on the internet. Effective legislation for decreasing piracy involves a internet that no one wans to use so even if you don't support piracy you still want to stand againt people calling for censorship and monitoring.
    Iommianity
    You can absolutely steal intellectual property. Is it 'stealing' in that you gain something tangible, physical, while someone else's inventory suffers? No. Is it 'stealing' in that you directly affect their profits? Not necessarily. Is downloading an album piracy in the way that selling bootlegs or uploading entire discographies is? Absolutely not. But it's still 'stealing', and you don't have the right to all the music you want just because it's there. You have to learn the massive difference between a right and a privilege. All of that, I download a ton of music, and for the past 10 years, I've bought far more music than I ever would have otherwise. Some people say "Use spotify/youtube", but I say no. My way ultimately has me buying more music and seeing more shows than the average user anyways, so it's a moot point. If I download something and like it, I buy it. If I buy it used, imo that's honestly the same thing as downloading it, except one is legal, while the other is not. Everyone needs to call a spade a spade and be honest with their actions.
    getawaygman
    though downloading music illegaly is wrong no questions asked,,,google is has much worse things to offer
    scarabs
    Downloading music should NOT be illegal. Music should be the property of everyone and therefore free to all.
    i know downloading has many benefits for some bands i don't see how you can justify it not being stealing. you can go down the "art" argument if you want but all other forms of art sell their paintings or books. it should be up to the artist not you if they want to sell it or not and most chose to sell it so they can make a living from it. (please don't claim it's the labels who are at fault here, they wouldn't have signed to their label if they didn't want any money from it) whether you like it or not it's theirs and if you take it for free it's stealing that particular album or song however many benefits it actually brings the band.
    xberserkx
    stonedhippos wrote: azianmusician19 wrote: UG sure likes to use "slam" a lot in their headlines... it's because it has a powerful connotation to it. if they said "nudged", it wouldn't have the same effect.
    It's actually because the UG writers are incapable of coming up with anything new. Much like this article in general that describes something that's been going on for years.
    Iommianity
    leohimself wrote: LightxGrenade wrote: Iommianity wrote: It's not the good ol' times anymore where you had these 5 or 6 popular bands and that was it. The hell does this even mean? Which times were these? lmfao my thoughts exactly, what era was he talking about? Before the radio was invented maybe? I'm talking about the era before internet. And don't tell me that you would've known all the bands you know now without file sharing.
    I wouldn't pretend to know all of them without the internet, but is that a joke? Before the internet (you really mean before the early 2000s, when file sharing REALLY took off) there was magazines, fanzines, other forms of print, television, radio, word of mouth. For metal and other forms of underground music, there was tape trading, letter sending, t-shirt trading. Bands the world over were being influenced by other bands on the other side of it, and having their voices heard. If you gave a shit about what you listened to, and were hungry for it, you could find new bands and obscure music. The only reason why it seems like music was narrower back then is because no one remembers the bad stuff, and a lot of the lesser known music remains lesser known.
    Holoogamooga
    Google's results are determined by "site popularity," or how many other pages link to them. They're right in saying it would be wiser to prevent them from advertising.
    Iommianity
    Idiots. When it comes to censorship it's all or nothing. You can't allow search engines to censor the online world. They are not the police and they should not be ruled by the police. Google are doing nothing wrong here.
    +1. That's such a ****ed up, slippery slope. It would be a nightmare.
    bustapr
    iommi600 wrote: Actually, Google removes all the illegal downloading from the search results if they get a notice from the labels or anything. Besides, it's not Google's fault that people use it to find stuff for free... Come on.
    this, cant blame google for providing an efficient way to find anything on the internet. they dont have to police the billions of searches done every day. you do your part and tell them which sites specifically have pirated stuff and they will block it off. its been that way for quite a while.
    MichaelScarn
    maybe you could sell your music DIGITALLY *cough cough* Robert plant- besides, even if a kid buys an album off of ebay, which is completely legal, and pretty much the only place to buy music
    mysticguitar77
    Okay, fine, I'll just use Yahoo then. I mean really, it's not going to make any difference at all if Google shows piracy sites or not in their searches. If people want to get music for free as long as the internet exists, there will always be a means and a way to do so. The only way for piracy to be completely stopped is if they have a total blackout of the internet to EVERYONE. It's the only way to stop it at least almost completely which will never EVER happen, but this is what these delusional people want to happen because they are too greedy to realize that it's never to work.
    dyerseve30
    We will never be able to 100% stop crime in cities... So let's have no police officers or law enforcement agencies... Sound stupid? yes. Just because piracy will always exist doesn't mean something should not be done to minimize it. Everyone knows piracy will always exist. That's not the point. Unemployment will always exist. As long as its under 4% we are good. Same with piracy. Battling piracy has created some great services for the consumer, such as Spotify or buying albums digitally. There's no excuse to pirate music or movies. Crazysam23_Atax.... use your head. Nothing is free.
    bustapr
    leohimself wrote: Omg these rich people complaining again because they can't get even more rich... I'm sick of all this.
    ^this is a retarded comment no matter what PoV you have on the subject. Just because theyre rich doesnt give you the right to pirate their stuff. grow some balls.