Universal Music Uses Bogus DMCA Claim To Take Down Negative Review Of Drake's Album

from the free-speech? dept

We keep talking about how the DMCA takedown process, all too frequently, is used to stifle speech, and defenders of the system claim that it's ridiculous to bring up the First Amendment in a discussion on copyright. But here's yet another (in a very long list) of examples. Henry Adaso wrote a short, but marginally negative review of Drake's album Take Care. The review was posted to About.com last November. The entire review reads:

Drake - 'Take Care'

A briefly entertaining, occasionally ponderous, sometimes lazy, sometimes brilliant, slow-rolling, rap-singy, bulls-eye missing, kitten-friendly, runway-ready, mega corny, lip-smacking, self-conscious, self-correcting, self-indulging, finely tuned, Houston infatuated, crowd pleasing, delightfully weird, emotionally raw, limp, wet, innocuous, cute, plush, brooding, musical, whimsical, exotic, pensive, V-necked, quasi-American, strutting, doting, cloying, safe alternative to sleeping pills.

Best Song: "Lord Knows"

Release Date: November 15, 2011

Not particularly positive, but not particularly scathing either. He also posted another post on About.com that merely pointed to that review, but included no additional content other than that he wrote a 50-word review.

Either way, both of those links are gone from Google's search. Why? Because just as someone filed a bogus DMCA to take down one of our key SOPA posts, Universal Music, via the BPI (British RIAA) filed a DMCA notice with Google claiming that both of those pages were infringing. That's clearly a false takedown, and pretty clearly designed to stifle a negative review. Adaso discusses all of this in his own blog post, in which he suggests that perhaps Universal and BMI are purposely trying to take down negative reviews, though it's equally likely that they're just incredibly incompetent. Still, whether incompetence or malice, it's clear that the DMCA is being used to censor and stifle speech, and in this case it just so happens to be speech in the form of a negative review of a Universal Music Artist (a Universal Music artist who has also expressed displeasure with how Universal has used copyright law against his own best interests).

But, no, there's no free speech concerns around the DMCA, right?

Filed Under: copyright, dmca, drake, free speech, review, take down
Companies: bpi, universal music

Swedish Court Get The Pirate Bay Taken Down

from the sunk? dept

When the original ruling came out against The Pirate Bay's founders, one odd part was that there was no injunction forcing the site to stop doing anything. The entertainment industry quickly filed for one -- which seemed a bit odd, considering that the case was under appeal. The latest, however, is that a judge has ordered one of the main ISPs servicing The Pirate Bay to stop, making the site largely inaccessible. In the meantime, the gov't agency that was responsible for getting the founders to pay up has basically found that they can't find any money to collect, which aligns with what the four guys have been saying all along (that they don't own the site and don't make money from it).

Either way, congrats to the entertainment industry for temporarily wac(k)ing another mole. Considering the whole mess with GGF, it seems like most of The Pirate Bay's users are already migrating elsewhere, and a few people are setting up clone sites. Again, this certainly isn't condoning their behavior, but at what point does the industry realize that it's not helping matters. It's just further distributing the problem, making it that much more difficult to do anything legitimate. Update: And, of course, it only took a few hours until the site was back online. Keep on mole hunting, Hollywood.

Filed Under: sweden, take down
Companies: the pirate bay