[HN Gopher] Google is suing AI scammers and fake DMCA takedown s...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Google is suing AI scammers and fake DMCA takedown submitters
        
       Author : maoro
       Score  : 48 points
       Date   : 2023-11-14 05:51 UTC (17 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.google)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.google)
        
       | chris_wot wrote:
       | You know, I'd feel a lot safer if Google would fix the mountain
       | of malware in their Chrome app store.
        
       | arlattimore wrote:
       | > Our lawsuit targets bad actors who set up dozens of Google
       | accounts and used them to submit thousands of bogus copyright
       | claims against their competitors. These fraudulent claims
       | resulted in removal of over 100,000 businesses' websites, costing
       | them millions of dollars and thousands of hours in lost employee
       | time.
       | 
       | So Google needs to remove the sites first, likely to be legally
       | compliant themselves, hurt the businesses in question, then sue
       | to be able to re-instate the websites that they knew shouldn't
       | have been taken down in the first place?
        
         | Zigurd wrote:
         | It would be fair to say google should put more work into
         | vetting DMCA takedowns, but DMCA is a bad law, and it is
         | enforced badly. A long term coordinated effort at fraudulent
         | takedowns should be criminal in several ways: The false report
         | should be criminal. It should be a sworn statement. There
         | should be a statutory penalty against the reporting party.
         | Reporting parties should be bonded on a sliding scale. The
         | criminality should not be able to hide behind the corporate
         | veil.
        
           | gunapologist99 wrote:
           | Google is suing, and it's not even the harmed party.
           | Obligatory IANAL disclaimer applies, but surely a strong
           | first-party case could be made for, at least, tortious
           | interference?
        
         | resolutebat wrote:
         | Yes, but blame the DMCA, because this is literally what it
         | requires content providers like Google to do:
         | 
         | > _OSP must accommodate and not interfere with "standard
         | technical measures." "Standard technical measures" are defined
         | as measures that copyright owners use to identify or protect
         | copyrighted works, that have been developed pursuant to a broad
         | consensus of copyright owners and service providers_
         | 
         | Basically, if somebody claiming to be a copyright owner (even
         | if they aren't) files a claim saying they have copyright over
         | someting (even if they don't) using "standard technical
         | measures", Google "must accommodate and not interfere", meaning
         | they need to take down first and ask questions later.
        
         | kccqzy wrote:
         | I'm not an expert in DMCA but yes I believe that to be the
         | case. The only recourse for the victims is to file a counter-
         | notice, which obligates the service provider to start a waiting
         | period. Then the victim has to wait out that period before
         | having the content reinstated.
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | If they are following DMCA procedures and notifying the
         | targets, they can (even if there would be actual copyright
         | liability otherwise) restore without risk 10 days after getting
         | and notifying the complainant about a counternotice, at which
         | point the copyright claimant needs to sue the end user.
         | 
         | (Some hosts are lax about the end-user side of DMCA safe harbor
         | process, because they have no user-side liability that they
         | feel the need to avoid, and there's no other benefit to them,
         | besides PR, for taking any action after a takedown.)
        
       | hoppyhoppy2 wrote:
       | Discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38262124
        
       | PedroBatista wrote:
       | Does that include YouTube too?
       | 
       | If that's the case Google will be suing half the lawyers in the
       | US, many very powerful.
       | 
       | Either way, decades later looks like they want to put an end to
       | it, when figured out they are spending millions with this BS, not
       | because it was wrong in the first place and was ruining people's
       | business and lives.
        
         | reaperman wrote:
         | No, its a select few relatively non-powerful entities. They
         | will not be taking on the RIAA or MPAA, for example.
        
       | ecommerceguy wrote:
       | Be nice if Amazon did this on the merch platform.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-11-14 23:00 UTC)