[gorbachev]

So not only do they process illegitimate copyright strikes / DMCA takedowns, but they also don't process legitimate ones.

Google is broken to the very core.

This is what happens with a company that tries to minimize costs of support to zero.

[oefrha]

I have some experience in this regard, and Google, even though it’s known for nonexistent human support, isn’t even the worst. I helped a Chinese creator friend DMCA takedown a bunch of accounts on YouTube/Instagram/TikTok straight up stealing her content / impersonating her. TikTok’s response was fastest, one account was taken down within eight hours (to my pleasant surprise), another was taken down in three days. YouTube was all right, accounts were taken down in a week or so. Facebook/Instagram was the worst. They asked for the least info upfront in their takedown form, sent a bunch of follow up emails, then eventually just ghosted me. I initiated new email chains referencing the case ID but never heard from anyone. I had to negotiate with the account holder but that went nowhere either since my threat to take down the account turned out to be a joke. To this day the infringing account is still up.

[wisty]

IANAL but if you send a DMCA notice and they ignore it, they are (partly) liable. That's the point of DMCA.

File in a small claims court (or notify of your intent to do so) and see how long it takes to get a response ...

I wonder if you could probably even suggest a fee for damages, wasted time, etc due to their slow response and hope it's cheaper than them getting a lawyer to assess it ...

You would need to be the owner, and would know where to file though. If it's not your content, and you're "helping a friend" (but not actually legally representing them) then my guess is they haven't received a valid DMCA.

[randomQ11333]

yeah regarding facebook account takedowns...

my wife had an FB account registered on her old phone number. she had that account deleted (but FB 'deactivates' them by default, instead of actually deleting it). her old number then got reassigned after a few years to a new person by the carrier.

that person reactivated her account and started video-calling her relatives. aunts, cousins etc. and exposed himself to them. like literally all of her aunts have seen his dick by now.

she submitted a takedown notice for impersonation. didn't get a reply. went to file a police report, sent that along with a new takedown application. no response.

after some time we just gave up. we're not in the US, so i guess facebook just doesn't give a fuck and has these requests routed straight to the bin.

[user_7832]

Did you contact Facebook/Instagram legal? Very often, companies suddenly start caring when they're concerned about lawsuits and legal exposure.

[alex1138]

They 'trust me'. Dumb fucks https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1692122

[kazinator]

Fake DMCA requests that harass creators are far worse than not taking action in legitimate cases.

The whole copyright policing thing should basically just die.

Or have it be crowdsourced. If enough thousands of (distinct, genuine) viewers flag something as being a rip-off, then take action.

[BiteCode_dev]

All web providers do this, not just google.

I have hosting that regularly shut down my servers based on legal demands from jurisdictions that should have no reach my service whatsoever, or on total bogus claim.

If I refuse to act, they shut me down. If I'm late in acting, they shut me down.

Zero check on the legitimacy on the claim, zero trust in my debunking the claim.

The reality is, it's not economically viable to do so. I'm not giving them enough money to be worth it. So as long as I'm a small actor, anything that looks remotely legit is just processed as-is with no recourse.

The entire world can basically impose its view on me as long as they find a convincing way to tell my hosting "you are at risk".

And it's not one single provider either. Most of them do that: domain name, vps hosts, proxies, caches, etc.

The system is broken.

[owebmaster]

This post is about Google, not all providers. Don't astroturf, create a post about all providers

[baranul]

A major part of this problem appears to be that there is no identifiable humans in the loop to bring complaints to. Many of Google's responses are automated and black box algorithms.

When a Google response to a problem is outright bonkers, there is often not much that can be done, but to keep hitting the head on the wall (hoping something different happens) or be the lucky few that can get or has a human contact at Google. From what I've read and heard, those with human contacts, often have been identified as needing special attention. Where they are persons who are making significant money for Google and the businesses they own or can create problems in court.

[JumpCrisscross]

Do the e-mails sound like an AI?

I wonder if PDF’ing some random nonsense and referring to them authoritatively would get through. The author’s e-mails are friendly. What it might be looking for is corporate legalese.

[hsuduebc2]

The times when google was the good guy of the internet is over. Now it's basically Microsoft with much higher product qualities.

[bschwindHN]

> Now it's basically Microsoft with much higher product qualities.

At first I thought you meant "Now, [the good guy of the internet] is basically Microsoft with much higher product qualities."

I see what you meant now, in that google is reaching microslop levels of shittiness with slightly shinier shit.

[jonas21]

You're getting at the crux of the issue: it's very hard to distinguish legitimate DMCA takedown requests submitted by individuals from illegitimate ones, and occasionally, they're going to make mistakes. Anything that the author said in his emails could have just as easily been said by someone else who was trying to take down the content illegitimately.

At the end of the day, the best option is to use an attorney who knows the right procedures and would also run the risk of professional consequences if they submitted false claims.

[digitalPhonix]

> Anything that the author said in his emails could have just as easily been said by someone else who was trying to take down the content illegitimately

Ok, but then Google needs to say what would convince them that the author is who they say they are. The author asked multiple times how they prove they’re the real author and Google’s replies never even acknowledge the question.

[rcxdude]

Also, the ones abusing the system tend to know it better: often it's their jobs to figure out how to work it to get what they want. The people who just want to use legitimately often it don't have the time and experience to learn it.

(You see a similar thing with benefits and healthcare: often attempts to crackdown on people abusing the system just make it harder for legitimate users)

[ChrisMarshallNY]

I suspect the author is self-published (I don’t know him well, but his emails seem to indicate this).

One of the things that you get, when dealing with a publishing house, is a bunch of IP lawyers on speed-dial.

If you register works with the LoC, it might help in these situations (it isn’t required, but this is exactly the type of thing that it’s supposed to address).

[ndiddy]

The whole point of the DMCA takedown process is that it's rubber-stamp on the part of the service provider and all decisions regarding validity are left up to the courts. That's why there's a provision built into the law for the person receiving the claim to file a counter-notice to get their content reinstated. If Google is inserting themselves in the middle and denying claims because they don't believe that the person filing them is authorized to do so, I'm not sure whether that's proper procedure under the OCILLA.

[7bit]

You are completely missing the point. Mistakes can be made. But OP asked repeatedly what he must provide so Google can validate his identity. They didn't answer his questions, even after OP asked multiple times.

This is not a "mistake", that is negligence.

[thayne]

I also suspect those responses were all generated by an AI.

[cebert]

> At the end of the day, the best option is to use an attorney who would at least run the risk of professional consequences for submitting false claims.

What if folks signed their work with a private PGP key and published their public key? If you wanted to submit a DMCA request, simply sign a message to prove you’re the content owner. It seems like that could work.

[emsign]

Google would be left by the wayside and quickly be gone if it hadn't embedded itself all across the web.

[reactordev]

Google has only cared about one thing for the last decade, being number 1. They were willing to sell their soul to beat meta and they’ll sell their skin to beat OpenAI.

[hackerbeat]

Yes, same for search. Results are useless and site owners suffer.

[wslh]

And when applying the law is so expensive.

[CuriouslyC]

It's not just goog, friend. It's capitalism down too the root.

Piracy is more a moral and political statement than an economic one.

[dmix]

This is a copyright law invented in 1998 from the UN https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIPO_Copyright_Treaty These things predictably always have ways for moneyed players to abuse them and for organizations to half commit. Even China signed up.

[socalgal2]

oh yea, because no other system has ever had a kafkaesque resolution system. Maybe look up the origin of those "kafkaesque".

[ptdorf]

Gotta cut on support to buy those AI GPUs.