More Negative SEO: File DMCA Complaints with Google

13 replies
  • SEO
  • |
Google announces that copyright complaints are now part of its ranking algorithm:

Google to Penalize Websites Flagged by Copyright Holders - WSJ.com

I've got a ton of these to make.

.
#complaints #dmca #file #google #negative #seo
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    That article just makes Google look bad IMO.

    Google is basically saying they didn't care If anyone was stealing content & ranking the content in their SERPs until Google is in a position to make a lot of money from the content that was previously stolen & ranked in their SERPs.

    That's two-faced. :rolleyes:

    Any link to a Google press release or Google post?
    Signature
    Hi
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6772596].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6772750].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author retsek
    Alright let's calm down.

    1. Filing a DMCA means you have to show yourself (somewhat). Not exactly as willy nilly as ordering 50k links off Fiverr.

    2. They say they only consider valid DMCAs. Many DMCAs get filed and they are denied because nothing is being infringed upon. And if you do have infringing content, it's now your job (as it always should be) to take IMMEDIATE ACTION and have it removed and file a counter notice.

    I have several websites. I put in alot of time sending out scores of DMCAs per month for content I either wrote or paid for. My personal feeling is what took them so long.

    Edit. It does stink to high heaven that youtube seems to be exempt from this algo factor though. DMCAs to them and to blogger are handled separately. Those two sites are in Top 100 sites that get DMCAs, Youtube is probably #1.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6772942].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by retsek View Post

      My personal feeling is what took them so long.
      The article/link in OP pretty much sums it up, Google is trying to break into Apples territory (pay for downloads (music/video)) in a big way.

      Follow the money trail...

      Before trying to get in on the download money, Google didn't care because they had nothing to gain. In order to please the music industry, Googles trying to publicly show good faith, I imagine to get contracts with the music industry so Google can sell their music/videos.

      When I was a kid, I would have called what Google's doing, brown nosing, lol.

      I doubt Google will play hardball with anyone infringing on music/video copyrights unless that same music/video can be bought/downloaded from Google.

      Basically Google found a way to monetize the illegal music/videos that already showed up in Google search.

      I predict what will happen next is, all the music industry will jump on board with Google selling music/videos because If they don't then the music industry is guaranteed to not make a sale, at least with Google holding their music hostage in the SERPs (illegal vs. paid downloads) the music/video industry makes more money (better than nothing).

      Meanwhile, Google is playing Mr. Nice-Guy.

      Let's keep an eye on the music industry & see how many partner up with Google, something like this could seriously turn the table on Itunes in a few short years.

      If Google pulls this off, it will be forever known as "The Great Google Scheme of 2012", lol.
      Signature
      Hi
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6773050].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author retsek
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

        The article/link in OP pretty much sums it up, Google is trying to break into Apples territory (pay for downloads (music/video)) in a big way.

        Follow the money trail...

        Before trying to get in on the download money, Google didn't care because they had nothing to gain. In order to please the music industry, Googles trying to publicly show good faith, I imagine to get contracts with the music industry so Google can sell their music/videos.

        When I was a kid, I would have called what Google's doing, brown nosing, lol.

        I doubt Google will play hardball with anyone infringing on music/video copyrights unless that same music/video can be bought/downloaded from Google.

        Basically Google found a way to monetize the illegal music/videos that already showed up in Google search.

        I predict what will happen next is, all the music industry will jump on board with Google selling music/videos because If they don't then the music industry is guaranteed to not make a sale, at least with Google holding their music hostage in the SERPs (illegal vs. paid downloads) the music/video industry makes more money (better than nothing).

        Meanwhile, Google is playing Mr. Nice-Guy.

        Let's keep an eye on the music industry & see how many partner up with Google, something like this could seriously turn the table on Itunes in a few short years.

        If Google pulls this off, it will be forever known as "The Great Google Scheme of 2012", lol.
        You sum up it up nicely. They (and their nice friends-to-be) stand to gain from this.

        I like how SEL has dubbed it the Emanuel udpate.
        http://searchengineland.com/dmca-req...gorithm-130118
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6773075].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author yukon
          Banned
          Originally Posted by retsek View Post

          You sum up it up nicely. They (and their nice friends-to-be) stand to gain from this.

          I like how SEL has dubbed it the Emanuel udpate.
          The Emanuel Update: Google Will Penalize Sites Repeatedly Accused Of Copyright Infringement
          Yes indeed, there's big money in downloads.

          Here's what I figure Google will do to any part of the music industry that doesn't participate.

          Google said they would slap entire sites that continually get copyright infringement notices (according to the WSJ article). I would be surprised If Google actually slaps an entire site for the folks in the music industry that don't want to work with Google, which leaves the illegal site wide open to continue posting the same exact music/video on another URL on the same site (Google ransom).

          What a freakin racket, ha, ha.

          They should follow the animal name theme & call it the Shark update, because I think Google is positioned to go for the kill with this, against Apple.

          The thing I don't get is why Google tried to do another start up with G-Play, why not just use Youtube, after all Youtube is the kingpin of online video, why move traffic to a lesser known site (G-Play)?
          Signature
          Hi
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6773177].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author paulgl
          I don't get the problem from the title and OP.

          Nothing here to see, move along.

          There are still over 200 things google looks at in ranking.
          Why are you worried about one measly little ol' signal way
          down on the list?

          I don't have copyrighted stuff on my site. Never have, never will.

          Each and every time someone asks about it, I say, don't do it.

          If you have copyrighted material on your site, shame on you.

          People just don't read or misquote google. They are talking about
          copyrighted stuff that matters. Songs, movies, TV, etc. They
          are not going to bother with joe shmo and some lame@$$ article
          on wii games being copied from another site. In fact, they really
          should deindex both of you, but I digress.
          Here's what they are talking about:
          http://www.google.com/transparencyre...right/domains/

          Google is talking illegal filesharing. Period. They only care about
          big name entertainment companies protecting their proerty.

          If you are doing that, you deserve all you get.

          This "new search signal," should affect zero members of the WF.

          Paul
          Signature

          If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6773219].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
      Originally Posted by retsek View Post

      They say they only consider valid DMCAs. Many DMCAs get filed and they are denied because nothing is being infringed upon.
      Respectfully, you have no idea what you are talking about.

      Virtually all DMCAs result in content being removed. It is only in the rare instance when a counter DMCA is filed does the content come back.

      The "validity" of a request only means the legal requirements for making the request have been met. That has nothing to do with whether there is actual infringement or not. That is for a court to decide.

      Here is a story indicating Google complies with 97% of all DMCA requests.

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...ests-copyright


      .
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6774035].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Fraggler
        Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

        Virtually all DMCAs result in content being removed. It is only in the rare instance when a counter DMCA is filed does the content come back.
        Any comments on the 'search engine reputation managers" issuing DMCAs to get a link removed that they placed off someone's site? I think those are being sent to hosts but couldn't they be sent to Google if it gives this sort of response?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6775000].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
          Originally Posted by Fraggler View Post

          Any comments on the 'search engine reputation managers" issuing DMCAs to get a link removed that they placed off someone's site? I think those are being sent to hosts but couldn't they be sent to Google if it gives this sort of response?
          A link is not copyrightable content subject to a DMCA complaint.

          But of course, that will not stop some from filing these requests. I do not know how Google would handle it. Try it and see what happens.

          Google has opened itself up to a zillion requests being filed, which is why I mentioned 'negative SEO' in the thread title. Like Penguin, another step where the rankings have nothing to do with providing the best or most relevant content, and another opportunity to damage a competitor's rankings.

          .
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6780962].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Signature
    Hi
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6773224].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author retsek
    Another article:
    How YouTube Will Escape Google's New Pirate Penalty

    TL;dr version:

    Google: “We’re Treating YouTube Like Any Other Site”
    I did ask Google about all this and was told

    We’re treating YouTube like any other site in search rankings. That said, we don’t expect this change to demote results for popular user-generated content sites.
    I just don’t see that. There’s no way to treat YouTube — or Blogger — like any other site in the search rankings, when those sites have special takedown forms that don’t allow their alleged infringing activity to measured up against other sites.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6773645].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WarGasm
    LOL, according to the article they're receiving over a million copyright notices a week. How on earth are they going to be able to look into all of them to see if they're actually valid? This leads me to conclude they're basing their information on the word of anybody that feels like flushing a competitor down the toilet because they can't possibly validate all these copyright claims.

    Not to mention Google is being investigated and sued for copyright infringement themselves on multiple occasions. What hypocrites!

    http://www.aaronkellylaw.com/online-...says-fair-use/

    http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/indus...06893552.story

    http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/News...ists-66613.asp

    Another FAIL for the Big G. If you tried to do one tenth of the crap they pull off your site would be de-indexed faster than a speeding bullet.

    And for those who think Google is doing this to be moral and honest, LOL! Everything they do is calculated to benefit them in some way, and they are the king dingaling when it comes to shady business practices.

    Don't believe me, do a little research:

    http://www.zdnet.com/blog/google/1pl...t-lawsuit/3066

    http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/pag...yright-lawsuit

    http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com...led-09654.html

    http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/07/i...gainst-google/

    http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/n...c-privacy-suit

    http://www.webpronews.com/google-fac...rivacy-2012-03
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6781254].message }}

Trending Topics