German Film Distributor Issues Takedown Request Falsely Targeting IMDb, Reddit And Techdirt
from the HOW-DO-I-ANTIPIRACY dept
You'd think it wouldn't be too hard to vet a DMCA takedown request for false positives, especially when the request only includes 28 URLs. You'd be wrong.
TMG (Germany's Tele Munchen Group, which acts as a European distributor for several motion picture studios) issued a takedown request on behalf of Universal Pictures France, hoping to delist links to a few movies. But its algorithm is obviously flawed.
To start with, it listed our article on the Hacking Team hack under its list of supposedly infringing URLs for the movie "Hacker."
Now, Hacking Team itself announced shortly after the data dump that "law enforcement was involved" and that orders were being sent out to have their leaked documents and emails removed from the web. Without a doubt, Hacking Team does have law enforcement involved somewhere, but takedown notices from the company itself have yet to arrive. (Third parties seem to be a bit more active on that front.) And with the documents stashed multiple places around the web, any takedown requests will be little more than symbolic.
I doubt it's using distant third parties to achieve its takedown goals, but clumsy, automated, Googling, "content protection" companies and rights holders are perfectly capable of inadvertently achieving the same aim.
It appears TMG's search for infringing URLs includes little more than the title, as this same request also targets a Reddit post that has nothing to do with its "Hacker" movie.
Instead, this links to a twitch.tv account of a gamer allegedly using hacks to get an edge in DotA 2 (Defense of the Ancients 2). Obviously, this has nothing to do with copyright infringement.
And, for good measure, TMG's efforts on behalf of Furious 7 in the same takedown request targets the movie's IMDb page. Because why not take down a wholly legitimate page on a wholly legitimate site that not only offers a wealth of information on the movie itself, but also acts as an unpaid promotional platform, what with its ample supply of trailers and links to retailers.
And, yes, some people will point out that most of what is targeted appears to be infringing content (or links to it). But here's the thing. It doesn't take long to vet small requests like these for false positives. At the very least, TMG owes it to the rights holders that pay for these services to issue legitimate takedown requests. Something like this making its way to Google makes TMG look, at best, clumsy, and at worst, incompetent and censorious. And while it's rarely a concern for rights holders and content protection companies, they also owe it to the rest of the internet to do their best to avoid targeting legitimate URLs -- especially those that have absolutely nothing to do with the content being "protected" and are, as in the case of IMDb, sites that can actually increase sales.
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: dmca, hacker, takedown
Companies: google, tele munchen group, tmg, universal, universal pictures
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Bill them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bill them
The sad thing is, it's usually costly for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No penalties for false takedowns
The root problem is that there are no penalties for false notices. Thus, the rational actor expends zero effort filtering out false positives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No penalties for false takedowns
* No penalties for copyright infringement
-or-
* Huge penalties for false DMCA takedowns
Bogus DMCA takedowns can harm businesses just as much as copyright infringement.
Copyright infringement can be done cheaply but cost actual money to go to court. Similarly bogus DMCA takedowns can be done cheaply but cost money to defend.
Just as copyright infringers might have to pay actual damages, bogus DMCA filers should have to pay actual damages.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How in the world did Techdirt get listed with pirate sites?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How in the world did Techdirt get listed with pirate sites?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How in the world did Techdirt get listed with pirate sites?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How in the world did Techdirt get listed with pirate sites?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How in the world did Techdirt get listed with pirate sites?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
>>> In all fairness there should be either:
-or-
* Huge penalties for false DMCA takedowns
Right... Because pirates are stealing value, and copyright holders are trying to protect property they created and paid to make, so that's totally equitable.
Sheesh. You pirates don't even pretend to be sane anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: >>> In all fairness there should be either:
Universal pictures makes nothing, and only distributes films made by other companies. It is all part of the Hollywood accounting scam that ensures that films do not make a profit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: >>> In all fairness there should be either:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: >>> In all fairness there should be either:
'Huge penalties for false DMCA takedowns'
do you see the word false?
Are you saying these DMCA's are legit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: >>> In all fairness there should be either:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: >>> In all fairness there should be either:
Sheesh. You shills aren't even hiding the fact that you're just plain assholes anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: >>> In all fairness there should be either:
Pirates causing 'harm'? Bad, terrible, must be stopped at all costs, collateral damage be damned.
Companies trying to 'protect' themselves, so ineptly that they target innocent people/sites? No biggie, it's not like having to consult a lawyer, or go through the process of defending yourself and/or your site from being taken down or delisted is that much of a chore.
So if pirates took the same tack, just downloading stuff at random, would that be okay then? I mean they wouldn't intentionally be infringing on any given copyright, and since 'accidental' or collateral harm is apparently acceptable, that would make the piracy fine then, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: >>> In all fairness there should be either:
No, they're infringing copyright. As for "value", that's questionable.
By attacking innocent third parties? How's that going to help copyright holders?
You should probably try to perfect your game a bit more. I doubt your paymasters are going to pony up for this level of incompetence much longer.
BTW, I recommend boycotting your employer's garbage, for this and a host of other terrific reasons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: >>> In all fairness there should be either:
But they are taking down content they did NOT create. The penalties should be the same, because by causing the takedown of something they do not own they are infringing on the true owner's exclusive rights to the material.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: >>> In all fairness there should be either:
...by lying about innocent third parties and forcing them to fight against such lies at their own expense. While doing nothing to effectively prevent infringement, of course.
Somehow, the losses borne by others in time, money and availability don't matter so long as your heroes get paid. This is why you're considered a dishonest fool.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wOULD IT BE FUN...
Then send that to the Producer..and show him what he is paying for..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Clever use of Striesand effect to promote their film.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Legal Standing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
localhost
http://127.0.0.1:4001/#/fr/
Really. See https://www.chillingeffects.org/notices/10969223#
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: localhost
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If this comment is hidden from view, out_of_the_blue considers it truth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trident Media Guard
[ link to this | view in chronology ]