• http://www.twitter.com/JeremyCMorgan Jeremy Morgan

    This perfectly reasonable given the requests are valid. That’s the trickiest part. But the likelyhood of competitors being able to generate a lot of valid DMCA requests against your site just to hurt you is pretty slim. 

    What this really means is, more spam removed from the index which is better for the rest of us.

  • http://twitter.com/jrpurdon Jeffrey Purdon

    Am I missing something, or won’t this have an enormous impact on YouTube showing up in Google search…

  • http://www.OfInteresttoMe.com/ Matt

    That’s exactly what I thought. YouTube is probably the site that gets the most DMCA request, and if it’s not it’s got to be pretty close. 

  • almondj

    Maybe I missed something, but how is Google finding the DMCA notices? Are they submitted to Google by the claimant?

  • http://twitter.com/jrpurdon Jeffrey Purdon

    Looking at that list from Google’s own transparency report, blogspot.com makes the Top 100. Will Google punish its own content hosting platforms as part of this update? Google was an opponent of SOPA because it held platforms responsible for user-generated content. I imagine that most of the sites penalized by this update would claim that they just provide an innocent service, and that they shouldn’t be blamed for what some of their users choose to do with the platform. I know, Google isn’t a government and they can do as they please with their service for whatever reasons they have. But it seems a little hypocritical of them, doesn’t it?

  • http://twitter.com/bradthomas223 bradthomas

    I can’t believe these Hollywood scumbags like Ari Emanuel comparing child porn to pirating movies???  Unbelievable. It’s no wonder people refuse to give them money and choose to steal them…

  • http://www.seo-theory.com/ Michael Martinez

    If the YouTube takedown requests are filed through Google’s Websearch DMCA form then they SHOULD be held against YouTube.  However, if they are filed directly through YouTube then they should NOT be held against YouTube.  Presumably Google can only use the data collected through its Websearch submission form to assess quality signals for the SERPs.  People should not expect or demand more than that as it would be unfair to do so.

  • http://twitter.com/Liv_Jones Liv Jones

    Good idea in theory, however considering Google’s poor execution of the last 2.5 years, I suspect that this will only benefit those that game the system, creating more anarchy than without it. For the love of God, what happened to Google???

  • http://searchengineland.com/ Danny Sullivan

    There’s a good argument that if Google is going to penalize other sites that do video hosting, then just because it has a separate for reporting infringement on its own video hosting service, that shouldn’t give it some type of web search penalty immunity.

  • http://twitter.com/NdnaJnz Jeff Safire

    Danny – thanks for this informative article. Suggestion: Ditch your current spell/grammar checker for one that can spell.

  • http://www.facebook.com/travis.prebble Travis Prebble

    This ought to be interesting. Within the first 1000 results, we have:

    teennick.com (as in Viacom)

    Will Google whitelist certain domains or will their algorithm use a ratio of total URLs to reported URLs in determining the signal strength?

  • http://twitter.com/BeckyLehmann Rebecca Lehmann

    Might as well be called the Funnyjunk Update… The Oatmeal rejoices. 

  • Mike_Smitty

    I’m sorry, I stopped reading after Ari Emanuel compared stealing to child pornography.

  • http://twitter.com/YoungbloodJoe Joe Youngblood

    I agree, but YouTube did a good job in recent years steering the industry to their own reporting form. It’s unlikely they would do that for smaller video hosting websites, especially considering the DMCA complains typically come from copyright troll firms, not the copyright holder themselves. So YT and the current big guys will get sparred, but any new video hosting website or smaller one might get nailed.

  • http://twitter.com/YoungbloodJoe Joe Youngblood

    most pirate websites run on word of mouth and social media. organic doesn’t do much, especially from an engine known to track your search history. I would venture to guess this would have little effect on that industry and a larger effect on the social websites and user generated content websites. two prime targets for Google’s own properties.

  • Gary Bisha

    All you have to do is post a project on mini freelance asking people to post a copy of your  content on competitor forum. Then file DMCA complaint against the website. Repeat it for many Web 2.0 sites.

  • http://searchengineland.com/ Danny Sullivan

    I’ve been writing very fast today, Jeff. I usually go back several time and read-through to catch things. If you spot something, please let me know.

  • http://withwindows.com Ricky Shah

    The big battle is coming. I know this is a kinda good strategy to curb piracy, but it would also lead to hefty DMCA complaints. Google should also penalize sites that indulge in wrong accusation. But again, how will Google decide that? 

    Let’s hope that Google will roll out the algorithm soon. It will be interesting to see whether ‘hit blogs’ will able to recover or not from such adjustment or penalty.

  • http://twitter.com/TXCooking Texas Cooking

    This is wonderful news, and a victory for intellectual property rights.  It’s interesting how competition has created the incentives for this, as opposed to passing a new federal criminal law.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Codex-Meridian/100002285341528 Codex Meridian

    Before we fear of negative SEO now we fear of negative DMCA, hurray amigos!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Codex-Meridian/100002285341528 Codex Meridian

    At least we have strong basis now for anti-trust lawsuits.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Codex-Meridian/100002285341528 Codex Meridian

     These DMCA notices are not final. They can be accusations and non-substantial. If Google will be using this data, it will be seriously erroneous – the birth of SEO and honest publishers worst fear – Negative DMCA!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Codex-Meridian/100002285341528 Codex Meridian

     Let’s say I created the videos (original, me as the creator),  I embed one in my site with the title exactly the same as in Youtube.

    Now the Youtube URL ranks very highly in the search, thanks to the bias Google algo that don’t reward true originators but counts only based on authority. If Google can penalize Youtube because of bad copyright reputation, I believe my original content in my site would rank well. No?

  • Fake Name

    Wait…. did Ari Emanuel REALLY try to equate listening to an Mp3 or watching a downloaded movie to pedophilia?

  • oelmekki

    So, Google is implementing on purpose an algorithm to prevent its users to find what they’re looking for ? That’s new.

    Also, I see in the list a lot of torrent websites. Justice stated that hosting torrent is *not* providing copywrited material. No worry, Hollywood, Google will apply its own justice. That, lads and gents, I call it “evil”.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001217400849 Kevin Egelston

    That doesn’t make any sense. Sites receive illegitimate DCMA takedown notices all the time. This can be abused by filing lots of DCMA takedowns against a competitor to cause them to loose search result rankings. Not to mention we shouldn’t even be entertaining any thoughts regarding MPAA/Hollywood’s take on piracy, they are the sole cause of piracy. I will not elaborate, there is plenty of research material out there, that is if we don’t start dropping the good material search rank results due to erroneous DCMA takedown requestions. This whole thing is ridiculous. The entertainment industry needs to evolve their business model with the way technology is going and stop being fucking pussies.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001217400849 Kevin Egelston

    Why don’t you try ditching your high horse fucking perfect spelling and grammar attitude. As long as you understood what was being conveyed, then shut the fuck up already.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001217400849 Kevin Egelston

    Really? You think this is a good thing? Please sell all of your electronic equipment and stop using the internet.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UMRJBOOIMADJYZKE42NT6NBWCU Albin

    Seems to me it would make more sense to correct search by counting actual takedowns, i.e. sites that respond to DMCA notices they receive, rather than assuming any and all notices are valid copyright claims.  Innocent until proven guilty.

  • http://searchengineland.com/ Danny Sullivan

    He was actually saying that Google has mechanisms for trying to keep child porn out of its listings. And if it can do that, why can’t it figure out a way to deal with other types of illegal content. It was a reasonable question; Google gave a reasonable response, though now it apparently has decided it can deal with the copyright detection.

  • JohnDoey

    I love how this reads as though the issue is a plague of false copyright infringement notices, and the victims are website maintainers who are too busy saving babies to ensure they are not illegally and immorally re-publishing the work of an independent musician who is dying right now from lack of health care.

  • http://www.rimmkaufman.com/ George Michie

    Ummm, laws against copyright infringement already exist.  It is the threat of lawsuits that is forcing the industry to act.  Absent legal protections there would be far fewer inventions and far less incentive to create top grade content.  It is the existence of law that protects individuals, not the market.

  • http://www.seopros.org Terry Van Horne

    Danny nice job but really! Is this a penalty or justice? I have a client that has been publishing for a long time often they are not ranking for the content they wrote. Google has been overdue in dealing with scrapers…. I hope when they are doing their copyright reviews they also remove them from AddCents as well…that would really be punishing them… and show real intent to stop this…but since that hits the bottom line…this is likely as far as it will go. But it’s the best attempt yet at actually stopping this internet disgrace! It also gives legitimate owners more power to get content removed. IMO, if the content is removed then punishment should be nothing… mistakes happen otherwise again they’ve added another arrow to the Negative SEO quiver.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jamesosix Jay Wylie

    He didnt just compare child porn to downloading a pirated film…did he?

  • http://www.facebook.com/jamesosix Jay Wylie

     “Look, Google can filter and does filter for child pornography. They do
    that already. So stealing is a bad thing, and child pornography is a bad

    No, CP is a terrible inhuman act, and stealing is a pretty basic “bad” in the grand scheme of things.

  • http://www.facebook.com/salocharly Salomon Ptasevich

    Google is getting lame indeed, downloaders and big amount of people…if we can’t find what we want in Google we will use other plataforms….

  • Matt Bingham

    Pornography is a bad thing. Yet they don’t filter that either. maybe they should start filtering it too, Ari Emanuel.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=698601890 Alex Bowers

    I imagine it takes more into consideration than just the amount of claims it gets. for example, the quality of the work thats on the website. Eg, blogspot.com won’t be done, but alex.blogspot.com might be. However, I might make good points (say, tech reviews) and just use someones copywriten images. That will get penalised less than someone that does full plagarism of somebody elses page.


  • jandetlefsen

    so did i