5 ms·
Ironically, the article points out that the original authors publisher actually put out two DMCA notices to google last year, apparently with no effect. I gues
by stalfie 3mo ago
Ironically, the article points out that the original authors publisher actually put out two DMCA notices to google last year, apparently with no effect.
I guess DMCA takedowns are only for the big fish fighting the good fight against car pirates.
- tchalla 3mo agoEventually almost every other regulation turns out to be one that benefits big players and doesn’t help smaller ones.
- conception 3mo agoUsually it’s easy enough to see who’s pushing for the regulation to figure out who will benefit from it. Eg https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2026/06/16/congress/meta-opposition-kosa-00964605 https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2026/06/16/congress/me...
- ryandrake 3mo agoThe entire purpose of the DMCA is that it’s a bludgeon that the rich and powerful can use to beat the poor and powerless. It was never meant for individual copyright owners to use against giant infringing corporations.
- rolph 3mo agothen DMCA the entirety of google and alphabet, and tender class action for direct and contributory violation, with the option to back it off to the literary work in question when goog takes a seat at the table and takes it seriously
- georgeburdell 3mo agoThat costs money
- rolph 3mo agoso does loosing a business.
- GroksBarnacles 3mo agoLosing*
- rolph 3mo agoboth spellings, while having differing implications, tend to be true.
- shimman 3mo agoWhy aren't they suing Google in court? Now is the best time to do this politically, the site doesn't mention what state they live in but I'd doubt that you wouldn't be able to get a state AG to listen to you if you reached out. edit to add: Google has ignored all safe harbor protections, they would lose this protection and be held liable for all damages. This seems like a pretty solid win for the author here if they're telling the truth.
- ronsor 3mo ago[dead]
- DrewADesign 3mo agoThere are a lot of really solid reasons someone might choose not to sue one of the world’s most powerful corporations over their core business practices, even being completely in the right. Pretty similar to reasons someone might not call the cops on some mafiosos that are blocking your driveway while fencing a truckload of stolen electronics.
- shimman 3mo agoI disagree, state AGs are taking any opportunity to attack big tech for easy political points. If you want justice, now is the best time to try and get it.
- DrewADesign 3mo agoFilling a complaint with the civil division of your AG so they can take legal action vs suing a giant powerful corporation and hoping the AG’s civil division steps in are very different things. I’ve also known numerous people who’ve filed multiple complaints with the MA AG with easily provable and well documented cases of repeated, ongoing wage theft as restaurant workers, at a time where service industry labor abuses were a popular hot button issue, and they didn’t even get a callback. Not exactly what you’d call a slam dunk. Not having support from the AG would be one of the very solid reasons I was referring to.
- Wowfunhappy 3mo agoSimon & Schuster is a small fish?
- downrightmike 3mo agoDMCA is no longer valid as the courts ruled that stealing literally everything on the internet was OK and a valid business practice.