Print
The UK's version of the RIAA, the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), has sent Google a cease and desist order demanding the removal of search results for sites that offer illegal downloads. The document points to nine "one-click" hosting sites which contain infringing material. Specifically, the BPI offers 38 links as proof of wrongdoing. They also include Google search queries that bring up the infringing material.
Google has, in the past, removed material from its own Blogger service that was found to be infringing. But the BPI is basically asking the search giant to censor their search results. The problem is that Google is not in the business of making editorial decisions about what content is allowed on the search engine. The results are generated by an algorithm.
We'll be interested to see how Google handles this request. If they give in, they could find themselves deluged with similar requests to censor their search algorithm. We've always felt Google should be a neutral indexer of the web, not the copyright cops. What do you think?
Comments are closed on this article
fociwm
June 23, 2010 at 9:31am
Just my opinion. I believe that the most powerful search engine must remain as neutral. Reason is simple. If it begins censoring, then other search engines will definitely take over it and it would be much more difficult to track down copyright infringement or illegal content detection. I'm optimist that copyright problem will be solved sometime in a reasonable way by a way of natural purification. Am I too optimistic? maybe... :-) But it is clear that the situation will be much worse if Goole censors. I strongly believe that HIDING is NOT a solution, and it only makes things worse. Imagine a cancer patient, and an MRI scanner. I almost feel like that censoring is similar to removing cancer detection algorithms from the MRI.
Caboose
June 23, 2010 at 7:43am
I'm interested in how Google plays this one out...
-= I don't want to be dead, I want to be alive! Or... a cowboy! =-
linkmaster6
June 23, 2010 at 5:00am
So is it just me or did everyone else read British Pornographic Idustry? I need some coffee
fiXXer
June 23, 2010 at 7:25am
I did too.. also in dire need of caffine. Did make for a good laugh though. As for the request, completely rediculous. You can't ask a serch provider to censor its results. If the BPI has a problem with sites that offer illegal downloads it needs to target those sites specifically. Don't shoot the messanger, man.
smeeIT
June 23, 2010 at 12:12am
Google starts censoring things upon request like this, then the internet will start its downfall.
Google IS "a neutral indexer of the web", and ALWAYS should be.
aldude505
June 22, 2010 at 7:45pm
This is very similar to something that is going on in other places in the world... I can't think of the place's name, oh wait, North Korea. You can either not censor the net or you have to censor all of it, there is no in between. There is no way you can ask Google to censor it's searches, that's not what Google does. Blaming Google for pirated material coming up in their searches is like blaming an indy car designer for designing a car that goes too fast. Google, like the designer, just came up with the most reliable, safe product they could, its all about how the end user uses it that could get them in trouble.
If Google does give in the Internet as we know it will be gone in 5 years with every producer and their mother getting in on the suing act and the book 1984 will be ever closer to being correct.
Just some food for thought...
tri8gman
June 22, 2010 at 8:01pm
Not the best analogy, as Google isn't the creator of those websites. It's more like asking a map maker to not include certain locations on their map.
Personally, I prefer Google remained as neutral a party as it can.
aldude505
June 22, 2010 at 9:18pm
I like your analogy a lot better than mine, but im glad we agree on net neutrality.
