Anti-Piracy Service, Guard Content, 'Protects' Rights Holder From Additional Sales, His Own Kickstarter Page
from the HOW-DO-I-ANTIPIRATE dept
There's no shortage of competitors in the anti-piracy field. Most of the manual labor involved in issuing DMCA takedowns has been handed over to proprietary software -- turning this into a high-margin, low-effort business for content protection companies. Some are only occasionally competent. Some are frequently horrific. And some are like Guard Content.
Though claiming to be located mere blocks away from the Simpsons family in "Springfield, USA," almost every word on its site appears to be only a fair approximation of English, suggesting either outsourcing or a location far removed from the proverbial heart of the nation.
Guard Content's "Contact" page clarifies that the Springfield it calls home is actually in Illinois, but it does so in reverse while leading off with wording that suggests this may actually be the address of the company that created the website. And it wraps this up with "You are welcome!" which is no "Thank you! Come again!" but will have to do.
This address doesn't actually exist. East Princeton Ave. in Springfield, IL, only covers addresses from 600-1100, due to it being located between 6th and 11th Street. There is no "13 E Springfield Ave."
The area code (646) traces back to Manhattan, NY, further separating this contact information from reality. But it all comes together when you view the site registration info, which puts the site owner at "Iaran 5, Alabama, AL 36006" and lists a Ukrainian email address.
The Ukrainian email address makes more sense when any attempt to purchase Guard Content's services leads you to this:
But this is the Age of the Internet. Physical locations don't matter. The real question is: DOES IT WORK?
Let's take a look at the sales pitch.
Our organization different from other organizations that agents of our company work with clients on strategies to protect against piracy individually.Excellent. Plenty of personal contact and a tailored application of Guard Content's "strategies," if I'm reading that more correctly than it's written.
Let's see some specifics:
We use a special anti-virus program that scans the Internet every day in search of stolen online products and goods.Now, you're probably thinking to yourself, "I have content I'd like to protect, but since my offerings aren't viruses, will this service work for me?"
I DON'T KNOW.
I can only assume the internet continues to get safer every day, thanks to Guard Content's constant anti-virus scanning. It hits all the best places, too, like warez sites, "auction sites," cyberlockers and the always-popular "orrent sites."
Let's dig a little deeper. How does this powerful anti-virus software find infringing material?
Our software will scan the Internet open spaces in search of copyright infringement, and our agents will receive and process the information.Ah, so it's not just the sites. It's the space between the sites. Got it.
Then we will send DMCA takedown obtained to get the content that really violated copyrights.Presumably, content only slightly violated will be left untouched.
All information is carefully checked by our experts and the customer is always informed and is aware of all the events and happenings.Well, I have my doubts about, well, several of these claims actually, but this last one in particular. We'll see why in a moment. But it should work well, considering the service starts at $80/mo. and tops out at $400/mo. It seems expensive, but not so much when you consider a "team of experts" is willing to serve you a physically-impossible "27 hours a day, 7 days a week." And, if nothing else, let's remember why we're all here: Napster or something.
A lot of people remember situation, when MP3 files was stolen illegal from computer of sound record company and owners lost not just files, they lost millions. This example of internet piracy, and it is not the most horrible one.Guard Content's "team of experts" seems to have all of three clients at the moment, but we're going to focus on Rob Percival, who doesn't seem to be getting his money's worth, despite receiving a majority of Guard Content's attention.
Rob Percival successfully Kickstarted a set of "complete iOS developer courses," which he now sells through Udemy and other outlets. I know this because Guard Content tried to have his Kickstarter page delisted by Google. The DMCA notice also targeted several legitimate outlets connecting potential buyers with Percival's offerings. It also attempted to delist pages at Reddit, Apple.com, makeuseof.com and Quora, where Percival's courses are discussed and recommended.
Not content with "saving" Percival from additional sales, Guard Content also targeted a random developer's LinkedIn page. And, for no apparent reason (other than completely misunderstanding what Chilling Effects does), Guard Content asked for the removal of 13 of its previous takedown requests from the DMCA archival service.
This isn't an anomaly. Guard Content does consistently low-quality work for Percival, either by duplicating previous requests or by targeting pages based on little more than the presence of words like "iOS," "Udemy" or "online course."
In another request, it tried to take down Kickstarter pages for two iOS developers, as well as two pages of courses at Udemy.com offered by other developers. Other stupidity/ineptitude contained within this DMCA takedown request include demands to remove stories from Businessweek and MacWorld, as well as the demand for the takedown of the entire PeerTorrent.com domain.
Fortunately for everyone involved, Google is less stupid than Guard Content's requests. The legitimate links remain live and accessible via the world's largest search engine. But this is a "service" Guard Content charges actual money for -- and, in Percival's case -- it would be doing more harm than good if it weren't for the recipient of the requests being vastly more competent than the sender.
I've let Rob Percival know about Guard Content's blundering efforts on his behalf. I assume he'll probably find his anti-piracy dollars are better spent elsewhere. An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing. The problem is twofold: this means anyone can file a request, no matter their personal level of competence. Secondly, low quality "services" are not only taking advantage of this option, but they're taking advantage of their customers.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: censorship, copyright, dmca
Companies: guard content
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Which would explain his recent absence. Troll's been busy trying to do *cough, cough* actual work for a change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shocking
Well ok, it's someone who creates iOS tuts via kickstarter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
You should really start reading the whole article and maybe twice just to make sure you understand it.
At least we are on the same page that the concept of copy right is weird. Why else would you put other peoples content in "? ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
I tip my hat to you, sir.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
Or maybe you've had an epiphany and are coming to the realization that the strawman "Techdirt" you've built up in your own mind isn't actually anywhere close to reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
When the real world starts to intrude on the alternate fantasy world that the delusional patient has constructed, it can take a lot out of that person's energy levels. It's OK. Relax, breathe, have a lie down and continue taking your meds. At some point your obsession will fade, your hallucinations cease and you may be able to re-enter normal society at some point. I'm glad your treatment is finally working.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Iaran 5, Alabama, AL 36006
is this article
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If ppl are paying ppl like this to do such a shitty job i sometimes wondering hiw well i would do just by actually putting in a tiny bit of effort, probably alot better than modt of these guys lol
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hire someone who doesn't care about collateral damage, and find yourself the victim of that mentality, seems like the best case scenario to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Until there is a fee to file, a penalty when you file absolute trash, & something to punish repeat offenders beyond that... this type of crap will continue. Hell for every 100th bad takedown open the door to ding the actual rightsholder for staying with a crap provider.
The people at the top only seem to care about numbers, oh look Martha - Content Protect filed 300,000,000 takedowns last month... they are worth the money.
What they do not see or understand is that 299,999,999 of them were invalid or targeted the legal routes to the content. Content Protect isn't going to tell the people employing them that their work is crap, they want to get paid. We need to cut into their profits, to force them to evolve to a real business that doesn't just submit every link from a Google search.
Perhaps Google might even use part of the penalty payments to send a note to the actual rightsholders showing the absolute failure of many of these companies to protect content.
I've seen polished sites and now this new low, but the single constant has been a very high number of these content protecting operations (even those from "reputable" companies) are total crap. Once again everyone else has to bear the costs & burdens of these poor monopoly holders. If they understood these methods were not actually helping, perhaps they might understand that creating easier access to legal content is better than living in the past where they had total control.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HOLY CRAP! "An easy, accessible system for combating infringement is a generally a good thing."!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]