4 ms·

Or the other way around, Google could cut them off or penalize them in their app store in retaliation, citing them as bad customers.

nickpsecurity 11y ago
Penalize them in search results too. Wonder what chunk of Google's ad revenue comes from movies. Might be small enough to loose for a short time. Do it before a blockbuster release. Unlikely to happen.
- JoshTriplett 11y ago
  > Wonder what chunk of Google's ad revenue comes from movies. The more interesting question is what chunk of movie revenue comes from Google.
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    I think they're both very interesting in this context. ;)
- mc32 11y ago
  Wouldn't your suggestion as well as parent suggestion border on monopolistic abuse? Wouldn't this be akin to MS telling Dell it's going to yank windows licensing in retaliation for selling red hat.
  - white-flame 11y ago
    As the parent, yeah pretty much. :-) It's not necessarily a proper response, but one in line with the thread's OP. I'd also argue that it's not technically monopolistic, but would certainly have negative consequences to the ??AA "partners" as well as chilling effects on others. But if Google wanted to take a nuclear approach, that'd certainly be one tack.
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    Oh there's a ton of legal risk all around. I'd suggest they have their lawyers and many available brains to consider how best use their position as leverage. Personally, I'd be looking into ways to use the leaked documents against Hood and preferably in a way that sets a precedent that's pro-Google. Not just griping but a full on attack on his career or image. It's what he was about to do to them after all.
RexRollman 11y ago
What they should do is require all DCMA notices to be submitted via a webform that has to pass a CAPTCHA. As far as I know, there is nothing that requires Google to accept automated DCMA notices from the MPAA.

nickpsecurity 11y ago

Penalize them in search results too. Wonder what chunk of Google's ad revenue comes from movies. Might be small enough to loose for a short time. Do it before a blockbuster release. Unlikely to happen.

JoshTriplett 11y ago
> Wonder what chunk of Google's ad revenue comes from movies. The more interesting question is what chunk of movie revenue comes from Google.
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  I think they're both very interesting in this context. ;)
mc32 11y ago
Wouldn't your suggestion as well as parent suggestion border on monopolistic abuse? Wouldn't this be akin to MS telling Dell it's going to yank windows licensing in retaliation for selling red hat.
- white-flame 11y ago
  As the parent, yeah pretty much. :-) It's not necessarily a proper response, but one in line with the thread's OP. I'd also argue that it's not technically monopolistic, but would certainly have negative consequences to the ??AA "partners" as well as chilling effects on others. But if Google wanted to take a nuclear approach, that'd certainly be one tack.
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  Oh there's a ton of legal risk all around. I'd suggest they have their lawyers and many available brains to consider how best use their position as leverage. Personally, I'd be looking into ways to use the leaked documents against Hood and preferably in a way that sets a precedent that's pro-Google. Not just griping but a full on attack on his career or image. It's what he was about to do to them after all.

RexRollman 11y ago

What they should do is require all DCMA notices to be submitted via a webform that has to pass a CAPTCHA. As far as I know, there is nothing that requires Google to accept automated DCMA notices from the MPAA.