5 ms·

The Lumen "DMCA removal request" linked from the Google search results page: A Removal Request Sent To Google - Notice in Process Re: Unknown NOTIC

The Lumen "DMCA removal request" linked from the Google search results page: A Removal Request Sent To Google - Notice in Process Re: Unknown NOTICE TYPE:Other ACTION TAKEN:Unspecified Explanation of complaint This is NOT a notice. It is a PLACEHOLDER for a notice that is not yet available for viewing. Do not request to view the URLs associated with this placeholder, there are none. Lumen has recently received, from Google, notification of a removal request originally sent to Google. Once that removal request has been processed by Google, it will have its own unique ID number, URL, date and other associated information, and a copy of the request will be present within Lumen's database. Thank you for your patience. https://www.lumendatabase.org/notices/15710816 https://www.lumendatabase.org/notices/15710816

walrus01 5y ago
for a moment I thought this lumen and URL was in some way related to the giant amalgamated telecom/ISP entity Lumen, the combined centurylink/Level3. not a bad name for a project to shine light on things but could be confusing.
judge2020 5y ago
In general it seems Google honors all DMCA requests immediately, and only rejects them after they're able to review it. Wonder if this could be used maliciously for stuff closer to Google's chest, eg. blacklisting youtube.com/premium or store.google.com/product/pixel_6_pro (of course, this would be illegal, however IIRC there haven't been any cases involving punishment for issuing false DMCAs)
- olliej 5y ago
  They’re required to. The DMCA safe harbor provisions require claims to be taken as true by default, and then if the victim responds with “this is false” the original claimant has two weeks (iirc) to respond, during which the recipient is meant to keep the content unavailable.
  - thayne 5y ago
    In other words, guilty until proven innocent.
  - wmf 5y ago
    Doesn't the DMCA allow hosting providers a reasonable time (e.g. 24 hours) to respond to takedowns?
    - Quekid5 5y ago
      Possible, but if you're running a fully automated company... what difference would that make? If anything it'd be a liability... a risk of your "cron job" being a bit late or something.
      - wmf 5y ago
        Delaying the takedown by 23 hours or so could prevent this exact kind of screwup.
        olliej 5y ago
        Alas it wouldn’t in the case that it doesn’t get press. Because the person who made the original claim has like two weeks to respond and the content can’t be returned until they respond or two weeks is up
  - schoen 5y ago
    My recollection is that the recipient of the claim could also voluntarily waive DMCA immunity over that specific claim by consciously deciding not to honor it. I don't know how to substantiate that recollection, though, and even if that's right, it would definitely be a heightened risk for the service provider to choose to take on.
    - magicalist 5y ago
      > My recollection is that the recipient of the claim could also voluntarily waive DMCA immunity over that specific claim by consciously deciding not to honor it. This is another way of saying if you don't follow the DMCA you become liable for the infringing content (if the content owner sues and is successful, of course), which is indeed what the DMCA says :)
- wmf 5y ago
  Such a takedown would be reviewed and reversed within minutes, of course.
  - ziml77 5y ago
    DMCA complaints against Google's own property are sure to get special review. They're not involved as just an index or host, you're directly accusing them of copyright infringement.
    - trulyme 5y ago
      Yes, that is the reason for the special review, and not that it hurts them instead of a 3rd party. (/s, in case it isn't obvious)

walrus01 5y ago

for a moment I thought this lumen and URL was in some way related to the giant amalgamated telecom/ISP entity Lumen, the combined centurylink/Level3. not a bad name for a project to shine light on things but could be confusing.

judge2020 5y ago

In general it seems Google honors all DMCA requests immediately, and only rejects them after they're able to review it. Wonder if this could be used maliciously for stuff closer to Google's chest, eg. blacklisting youtube.com/premium or store.google.com/product/pixel_6_pro (of course, this would be illegal, however IIRC there haven't been any cases involving punishment for issuing false DMCAs)

olliej 5y ago
They’re required to. The DMCA safe harbor provisions require claims to be taken as true by default, and then if the victim responds with “this is false” the original claimant has two weeks (iirc) to respond, during which the recipient is meant to keep the content unavailable.
- thayne 5y ago
  In other words, guilty until proven innocent.
- wmf 5y ago
  Doesn't the DMCA allow hosting providers a reasonable time (e.g. 24 hours) to respond to takedowns?
  - Quekid5 5y ago
    Possible, but if you're running a fully automated company... what difference would that make? If anything it'd be a liability... a risk of your "cron job" being a bit late or something.
    - wmf 5y ago
      Delaying the takedown by 23 hours or so could prevent this exact kind of screwup.
      - olliej 5y ago
        Alas it wouldn’t in the case that it doesn’t get press. Because the person who made the original claim has like two weeks to respond and the content can’t be returned until they respond or two weeks is up
- schoen 5y ago
  My recollection is that the recipient of the claim could also voluntarily waive DMCA immunity over that specific claim by consciously deciding not to honor it. I don't know how to substantiate that recollection, though, and even if that's right, it would definitely be a heightened risk for the service provider to choose to take on.
  - magicalist 5y ago
    > My recollection is that the recipient of the claim could also voluntarily waive DMCA immunity over that specific claim by consciously deciding not to honor it. This is another way of saying if you don't follow the DMCA you become liable for the infringing content (if the content owner sues and is successful, of course), which is indeed what the DMCA says :)
wmf 5y ago
Such a takedown would be reviewed and reversed within minutes, of course.
- ziml77 5y ago
  DMCA complaints against Google's own property are sure to get special review. They're not involved as just an index or host, you're directly accusing them of copyright infringement.
  - trulyme 5y ago
    Yes, that is the reason for the special review, and not that it hurts them instead of a 3rd party. (/s, in case it isn't obvious)