7 ms·

Google helps Scientology billionaire Bob Duggan hide a dark family secret (2015)

235 points by nceqs3 5y ago

cmeacham98 5y ago
Assuming this "complaint under the DMCA" was a standard DMCA takedown Google is legally obligated to do the takedown, or assume your liability (hint: they aren't going to do this). Did Google not give them the option to file a counterclaim? Of course Google isn't going to check your website to see if you replaced the images, that's not their job. That's on purpose, that's how the law works. Takedown takes the content down, counterclaim puts it back up, then the claimant sues if they still disagree.
- kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
  Google doesn't host web site content. They are not obligated to take down anything from their search index. They also don't implement the full DMCA process where you can submit a counternotice and have all disputed content restored immediately.
  - adolph 5y ago
    https://support.google.com/legal/troubleshooter/1114905?hl=en#ts=9814647%2C1115655 https://support.google.com/legal/troubleshooter/1114905?hl=e... Removing Content From Google Even if Google removes a webpage or image from our search results, we are not able to remove content from websites that host it. The page may still exist on the website and this means it can be found through the URL to the website, social media sharing, or other search engines. We recommend reaching out to the website owner to request removal.
  - cmeacham98 5y ago
    I don't think this has ever been settled in a court case, but Google is arguably rehosting the content, especially given their search cache of pages is publicly accessible. I wouldn't blame them for allowing DMCA takedowns to be on the cautious side. It's shitty if they don't give a way to counterclaim though, I've never been the recipient of a Google DMCA so I didn't know.
  - adrianmonk 5y ago
    Not a lawyer, but I think the law extends beyond hosting. From https://www.copyright.gov/512/ https://www.copyright.gov/512/ : > OSP stands for “Online Service Provider.” ... The DMCA contemplates four distinct kinds of OSPs ... referring or linking users to online sites using information location tools (e.g., search engines). And the text of the law itself (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512) describes DMCA immunity for: > infringement of copyright by reason of the provider referring or linking users to an online location containing infringing material or infringing activity, by using information location tools, including a directory, index, reference, pointer, or hypertext link
boomboomsubban 5y ago
Doesn't Google add a little note saying "2 links were removed due to DMCA claims, click here for details?" The absence of that note hints this is more than a boilerplate DMCA claim, though it also wouldn't surprise me if Duggan paid someone else for search engine optimization.
- Jansen312 5y ago
  Probably more than just SEO. DMCA isn't just stoppable by keywords optimizations. Someone in Google obviously did something special.
  - boomboomsubban 5y ago
    Or Google didn't remove it for a DMCA violation and the result is how effective spending a million on SEO for an infrequent term can be. This result seems possible with or without Google's help.
theginger 5y ago
What was the outcome of this story? Did the original story get reindexed? Did the take down story become the top result instead?
- jlund-molfese 5y ago
  Looks like it’s at least indexed, even if it’s not the first result for “Bob Dugan” anymore[1] [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=%22a+perplexing+tale+about+bob+duggan%22 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22a+perplexing+tale+about+b...
civilized 5y ago
Link has an autoplay video with sound. Some sales dork is yapping at me within seconds of the page loading. Sorry, no story is worth that.
anonymous-13669 5y ago
Holy smokes. Bob was the money-man at a place I worked, long long ago. He wasn't a billionaire then, just a measly little millionaire I think. He always was a blown-back-hairdo phony. One example: he at one point decided to read some inspirational business text to the whole company. Some jabber about productiveness, etc. While the rest of us dozing off to these empty phrases, he got so inspired that was moved to extemporize "Straight! Like a laser!" into it. That phrase, "Straight! Like a laser!" became an office joke after that. Now I really need to go read this article.
- ilrwbwrkhv 5y ago
  - alex_young 5y ago
    Is there something wrong with making fun of billionaires?
    - ffhhj 5y ago
      First we lost respect for millonaires, and they became billonaires. Now we will make fun of them, so they can become trillonaires! Nobody disrespects a trillonaire, EVER.
      - tkmunzwa 5y ago
        > Nobody disrespects a trillonaire, EVER. Former Zimbabwean quadrillionare here - just chiming in to say you're very wrong; that depends entirely on the currency :)
  - plankers 5y ago
    we make fun of him _because_ he's a billionaire, you rube
  - newsclues 5y ago
    Billionaires are many things but even the oligarchs with murderous goons are not beyond the reach of mockery of the common man.
youngtaff 5y ago
I get to see the reports from a few UK newspapers for articles that have been de-indexed in line with European data protection laws and without fail every article mentions someone that's been up to some shady shit… From men the have beaten their partners, or been found guilty of rape to people who've been found guilty of fraud every deindex involves someone trying to hide something bad they've done
- basisword 5y ago
  >> every deindex involves someone trying to hide something bad they've done What do you expect? People aren't going to be asking for articles about their charity work to be de-indexed. If someone committed a crime, served their sentence, and is no longer required to report it to potential employers, it makes sense they would try to get it de-indexed or most employers would ignore them unfairly after a quick search for their name.
  - AdrianB1 5y ago
    Unfairly? How is that unfair? In the old days of newspapers, one could not hide a newspaper article from manual search in the library. Digital indexing is just making search a lot easier, but it should not make it different as a proces, by hiding parts.
    - franga2000 5y ago
      Some would consider being haunted by one bad thing you did for your entire life to be unfair. People can change, but only if we as a society let then. A big reason for recidivism is that once people come out of prison, their job prospects are trash, so if they want to make a living, going back to crime is the best way. They went to trial, a punishment was selected and carried out, that should be the end (unless part of the punishment was being permanently labeled like with sex offenders, but we've seen how that can backfire). ANECDOTE ALERT: I'm vaguely familiar with a local case of an alcoholic abusive father who went to prison for a short time, then spent a few years in rehab/AA. He's a really sweet guy now, extremely ashamed of his past and doing everything he can to make things right (financially contributing to his family and working on repairing their relationships). He was a nobody alcoholic, so his name never appeared in any newspapers, but imagine if it had - he'd probably be broke, homeless and drinking again in no time. This is a pattern we often see with the "town drunks", who everybody knows as such and so any attempts they make to clean up are immediately met with distrust or even worse ridicule. So they never change.
bruceb 5y ago
The original story isn't even that much of a scandal. TL;DR: Rich family who are Scientologists has some adopted kids, sent a couple to live in South Africa with church members. Family then also funded once struggling Scientology organization there. Maybe they have lied about adopted kids still living with them, but rich people sending kids to live somewhere else isn't super rare. Seems maybe family more wanted to hide it from other members than the public?
theartfuldodger 5y ago
Looks normal, I've taken down hundreds of sites this way. Source your content correctly or make your own. What seems like a very well researched story is gone because of lazy understanding of rights. Just republish without the images, it's not a difficult SEO space to rank in, 301 the old article, contact anyone you can to replace the backlink to your new url.
- moneywoes 5y ago
  Any good SEO resources for beginners?
  - theartfuldodger 5y ago
    Can you define beginner more specifically? Knowing basic semantic structure like the back of your hand is required for quick review and composition, understanding basic buyer psychology is necessary for developing appropriate content to match the querier's needs. Most SEO content is garbage, rehashed, outdated, unproven. I have the benefit of owning over 300 sites and managing another 300 or so in some capacity including full analytics access. I don't often see content written by people who "do" and work across diverse industries. But if you define where you are starting I'd be happy to send a few ideas your way.
    - moneywoes 5y ago
      Have a basic understanding of semantic writing having done content writing years ago. However, as a developer currently looking to learn to market some tech adjacent ( ecomm software) ideas by writing a blog. I was under the impression that back link building was the primary driving factor towards good SEO? Is there anything you'd suggest to get started writing? I was looking to build an audience before starting a software project. Thanks
akudha 5y ago
So what makes these billionaires give so much money to a shitty organization like Scientology church? I guess they’re so starved for attention? Here is a thought. We should create an organization whose sole purpose is to praise the ultra rich people, in return for “donations”. We can then use this money to tackle issues like homelessness, public infrastructure etc. The bigger their donations are, the more outlandish the praise should be. We can hire the best songwriters, best sculptors etc for this purpose! What else are these rich people getting from these stupid organizations other than made up titles and praise? Why can’t we do the same and use the money for something good instead?
- MerelyMortal 5y ago
  People can be coerced to do things if they are being blackmailed or extorted. I wonder if some people are being told, the only way to get that part in a movie or TV show is by joining.

235 points by nceqs3 5y ago

Assuming this "complaint under the DMCA" was a standard DMCA takedown Google is legally obligated to do the takedown, or assume your liability (hint: they aren't going to do this). Did Google not give them the option to file a counterclaim? Of course Google isn't going to check your website to see if you replaced the images, that's not their job. That's on purpose, that's how the law works. Takedown takes the content down, counterclaim puts it back up, then the claimant sues if they still disagree.

kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
Google doesn't host web site content. They are not obligated to take down anything from their search index. They also don't implement the full DMCA process where you can submit a counternotice and have all disputed content restored immediately.
- adolph 5y ago
  https://support.google.com/legal/troubleshooter/1114905?hl=en#ts=9814647%2C1115655 https://support.google.com/legal/troubleshooter/1114905?hl=e... Removing Content From Google Even if Google removes a webpage or image from our search results, we are not able to remove content from websites that host it. The page may still exist on the website and this means it can be found through the URL to the website, social media sharing, or other search engines. We recommend reaching out to the website owner to request removal.
- cmeacham98 5y ago
  I don't think this has ever been settled in a court case, but Google is arguably rehosting the content, especially given their search cache of pages is publicly accessible. I wouldn't blame them for allowing DMCA takedowns to be on the cautious side. It's shitty if they don't give a way to counterclaim though, I've never been the recipient of a Google DMCA so I didn't know.
- adrianmonk 5y ago
  Not a lawyer, but I think the law extends beyond hosting. From https://www.copyright.gov/512/ https://www.copyright.gov/512/ : > OSP stands for “Online Service Provider.” ... The DMCA contemplates four distinct kinds of OSPs ... referring or linking users to online sites using information location tools (e.g., search engines). And the text of the law itself (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512) describes DMCA immunity for: > infringement of copyright by reason of the provider referring or linking users to an online location containing infringing material or infringing activity, by using information location tools, including a directory, index, reference, pointer, or hypertext link

boomboomsubban 5y ago

Doesn't Google add a little note saying "2 links were removed due to DMCA claims, click here for details?" The absence of that note hints this is more than a boilerplate DMCA claim, though it also wouldn't surprise me if Duggan paid someone else for search engine optimization.

Jansen312 5y ago
Probably more than just SEO. DMCA isn't just stoppable by keywords optimizations. Someone in Google obviously did something special.
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  Or Google didn't remove it for a DMCA violation and the result is how effective spending a million on SEO for an infrequent term can be. This result seems possible with or without Google's help.

theginger 5y ago

What was the outcome of this story? Did the original story get reindexed? Did the take down story become the top result instead?

jlund-molfese 5y ago
Looks like it’s at least indexed, even if it’s not the first result for “Bob Dugan” anymore[1] [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=%22a+perplexing+tale+about+bob+duggan%22 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22a+perplexing+tale+about+b...

civilized 5y ago

Link has an autoplay video with sound. Some sales dork is yapping at me within seconds of the page loading. Sorry, no story is worth that.

anonymous-13669 5y ago

Holy smokes. Bob was the money-man at a place I worked, long long ago. He wasn't a billionaire then, just a measly little millionaire I think. He always was a blown-back-hairdo phony. One example: he at one point decided to read some inspirational business text to the whole company. Some jabber about productiveness, etc. While the rest of us dozing off to these empty phrases, he got so inspired that was moved to extemporize "Straight! Like a laser!" into it. That phrase, "Straight! Like a laser!" became an office joke after that. Now I really need to go read this article.

ilrwbwrkhv 5y ago
- alex_young 5y ago
  Is there something wrong with making fun of billionaires?
  - ffhhj 5y ago
    First we lost respect for millonaires, and they became billonaires. Now we will make fun of them, so they can become trillonaires! Nobody disrespects a trillonaire, EVER.
    - tkmunzwa 5y ago
      > Nobody disrespects a trillonaire, EVER. Former Zimbabwean quadrillionare here - just chiming in to say you're very wrong; that depends entirely on the currency :)
- plankers 5y ago
  we make fun of him _because_ he's a billionaire, you rube
- newsclues 5y ago
  Billionaires are many things but even the oligarchs with murderous goons are not beyond the reach of mockery of the common man.

youngtaff 5y ago

I get to see the reports from a few UK newspapers for articles that have been de-indexed in line with European data protection laws and without fail every article mentions someone that's been up to some shady shit… From men the have beaten their partners, or been found guilty of rape to people who've been found guilty of fraud every deindex involves someone trying to hide something bad they've done

basisword 5y ago
>> every deindex involves someone trying to hide something bad they've done What do you expect? People aren't going to be asking for articles about their charity work to be de-indexed. If someone committed a crime, served their sentence, and is no longer required to report it to potential employers, it makes sense they would try to get it de-indexed or most employers would ignore them unfairly after a quick search for their name.
- AdrianB1 5y ago
  Unfairly? How is that unfair? In the old days of newspapers, one could not hide a newspaper article from manual search in the library. Digital indexing is just making search a lot easier, but it should not make it different as a proces, by hiding parts.
  - franga2000 5y ago
    Some would consider being haunted by one bad thing you did for your entire life to be unfair. People can change, but only if we as a society let then. A big reason for recidivism is that once people come out of prison, their job prospects are trash, so if they want to make a living, going back to crime is the best way. They went to trial, a punishment was selected and carried out, that should be the end (unless part of the punishment was being permanently labeled like with sex offenders, but we've seen how that can backfire). ANECDOTE ALERT: I'm vaguely familiar with a local case of an alcoholic abusive father who went to prison for a short time, then spent a few years in rehab/AA. He's a really sweet guy now, extremely ashamed of his past and doing everything he can to make things right (financially contributing to his family and working on repairing their relationships). He was a nobody alcoholic, so his name never appeared in any newspapers, but imagine if it had - he'd probably be broke, homeless and drinking again in no time. This is a pattern we often see with the "town drunks", who everybody knows as such and so any attempts they make to clean up are immediately met with distrust or even worse ridicule. So they never change.

bruceb 5y ago

The original story isn't even that much of a scandal. TL;DR: Rich family who are Scientologists has some adopted kids, sent a couple to live in South Africa with church members. Family then also funded once struggling Scientology organization there. Maybe they have lied about adopted kids still living with them, but rich people sending kids to live somewhere else isn't super rare. Seems maybe family more wanted to hide it from other members than the public?

theartfuldodger 5y ago

Looks normal, I've taken down hundreds of sites this way. Source your content correctly or make your own. What seems like a very well researched story is gone because of lazy understanding of rights. Just republish without the images, it's not a difficult SEO space to rank in, 301 the old article, contact anyone you can to replace the backlink to your new url.

moneywoes 5y ago
Any good SEO resources for beginners?
- theartfuldodger 5y ago
  Can you define beginner more specifically? Knowing basic semantic structure like the back of your hand is required for quick review and composition, understanding basic buyer psychology is necessary for developing appropriate content to match the querier's needs. Most SEO content is garbage, rehashed, outdated, unproven. I have the benefit of owning over 300 sites and managing another 300 or so in some capacity including full analytics access. I don't often see content written by people who "do" and work across diverse industries. But if you define where you are starting I'd be happy to send a few ideas your way.
  - moneywoes 5y ago
    Have a basic understanding of semantic writing having done content writing years ago. However, as a developer currently looking to learn to market some tech adjacent ( ecomm software) ideas by writing a blog. I was under the impression that back link building was the primary driving factor towards good SEO? Is there anything you'd suggest to get started writing? I was looking to build an audience before starting a software project. Thanks

akudha 5y ago

So what makes these billionaires give so much money to a shitty organization like Scientology church? I guess they’re so starved for attention? Here is a thought. We should create an organization whose sole purpose is to praise the ultra rich people, in return for “donations”. We can then use this money to tackle issues like homelessness, public infrastructure etc. The bigger their donations are, the more outlandish the praise should be. We can hire the best songwriters, best sculptors etc for this purpose! What else are these rich people getting from these stupid organizations other than made up titles and praise? Why can’t we do the same and use the money for something good instead?

MerelyMortal 5y ago
People can be coerced to do things if they are being blackmailed or extorted. I wonder if some people are being told, the only way to get that part in a movie or TV show is by joining.