House Hearing On File Sharing Turns Into 'But Why Can't Google Magically Stop All Bad Things Online' Hearing

from the no-surprise-there dept

You kind of knew where things were heading when the House decided to have pre-COICA hearings on what websites can do to deal with copyright infringement -- especially when they titled it "Promoting Investment and Protecting Commerce Online: Legitimate Sites v. Parasites." The very fact that they're presupposing certain sites as "parasites," suggests this hearing was not about reasoned discussion (is any Congressional hearing ever really about that?), but about pointing fingers, and the key finger pointing was directly at Google. I'll have a separate post on the "prepared remarks" of the various speakers, but the Congressional Reps in attendance apparently focused most of their attention on Google, wondering why it's not magically stopping infringement online.
"The question isn't what Google has done," [Rep. Bob] Goodlatte told the audience. "But more about what Google has left to do."

He listed some of the accusations that some in the entertainment industries have leveled at Google, such as the ability of the alleged pirate sites to fund their operations by posting Google ads on their site, as well as an inability by Google to remove infringing materials promptly.
Note what he did not do, which is point out that Google has gone significantly beyond what the law requires to help copyright holders. It's even set up ways for them to directly monetize content when it's found to be infringing online. You would think that helping copyright holders monetize is more important than "stopping infringement," but somehow no one ever seems to think that way. Also note that Goodlatte simply took the (mostly false) accusations by the entertainment industry as fact -- and didn't seem to pay attention to the fact that almost none of the accusations were accurate.

Of course, the real crux of the argument is this belief that Google can somehow wave a magic wand and make infringement disappear online. It's technological cluelessness at its most extreme. Google has a long history of responding quickly to take down notices and (in our opinion) bending over backwards, far beyond what the law requires, to help copyright holders both defend their rights and to make money. The idea that Google "profits" from infringement has simply not been shown at all. The entertainment industry has this weird belief that anywhere AdSense ads are displayed, that massive profits follow. This is simply incorrect. But, even if it were true, how is Google to know what is and what is not infringing? It's a simple question and no one answers it, other than to say, "it's obvious." Then when it's pointed out that it's not at all obvious, they go quiet.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 1:41pm

    You mean Google isn't the internet? Someone should tell Congress.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Ima Fish (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 1:52pm

    Remember in the old days when nearly everyone accessed the internet via Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser? Back then, plenty idiots thought that IE was in fact the internet. Or at they very least, they'd equate it with the internet.

    The same is now true of Google. Because people use Google to access sites, because they're too clueless to enter urls or save bookmarks, they think they're actually accessing materials on Google.

    To the old idiots out there: Google is like the yellow pages. It just points you were to go and it's not responsible for anything you do when you get there.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    sam sin, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 1:54pm

    seems reasonable to assume from the article that this particular Rep is an 'article' himself. totally clueless to all things internet related, not just Google related. why oh why dont these people do some research before opening their mouths and making absolute prats of themselves? why cant they see that the entertainment industries are using them? how often do we see entertainment industry 'high ups' come out with stupid statements, only to be shot down? these public representatives are supposed to know better, but in actual fact are much worse. they can ignore facts under the guise 'in the interest of the public'. what crap!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 1:55pm

    "What Google has left to do..."

    Is code for "make significant campaign contributions."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    crade (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 2:02pm

    "They go quiet"
    Go quiet? Never! Thats when they start repeating the things that they just said before and you just debunked, only usually much louder.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Matthew (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 2:11pm

      Re:

      BUT...BUT...PIRACY!!!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 2:56pm

      Re:

      They go quiet because they realize you're batshit insane.

      Those layoffs at record labels because half of their revenue disappeared are real. Those are job losses.

      The fact that Mike Masnick ignores them and writes snarky hit pieces every day here, demonstrate how committed he is to supporting piracy.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous a-hole, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 3:22pm

        Re: Re:

        Get it through your thick skull: The record labels are not the music industry in toto.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Nicedoggy, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 3:30pm

        Re: Re:

        Of course their revenue disappeared they sued everybody, called everyone a thief and thrown people in jail that have committed no crime, what did you expect a jump in sales?

        I don't believe the batshit insane person is the one you was calling.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Nicedoggy, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 3:32pm

        Re: Re:

        I can tell you right now, that I didn't buy anything from them in more then a decade, I also didn't pirate anything, why when I can find legal free alternatives.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        The Devil's Coachman (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 4:44pm

        Re: Re:

        The only reply that your idiotic post could possibly justify goes something like this:

        "Sod off, you wanker!"

        There ya go, pinhead.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        RadialSkid (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 10:06pm

        Re: Re:

        If I could vote "funny" 15 times for you, AC, I would. You're adorable!

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        techflaws.org (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 11:06pm

        Re: Re:

        Right, the job losses have nothing to do with the fact that their products SUCK!

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        The eejit (profile), Apr 7th, 2011 @ 12:54am

        Re: Re:

        Dude, if current music was any more manufactured, it would have a "Made in China" label on.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          amerikan idol musick de-generation, Apr 8th, 2011 @ 12:21pm

          Re: Dude, if current music...

          Hear, hear the eejit! I can't listen to the radio or turn on "music television" without the urgent need to purge from all orifices.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Hephaestus (profile), Apr 7th, 2011 @ 9:39am

        Re: Re:

        "Those layoffs at record labels because half of their revenue disappeared are real. Those are job losses. "

        You are so wrong ... its because of the Eminem lawsuit they lost half their revenue stream. :)

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Gwiz (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 2:07pm

    This really make some sense. If they can equate Google with the internet as a whole, then Google can be blamed for EVERYTHING.

    Think about it:

    - Banks use the internet for transactions - Banking crises is Google's fault.

    - Wall Street uses internet for transactions - financial crash was all Google's fault

    - Google Maps displays entire world - earthquake in Japan was Google's fault.

    - YouTube show videos of cats - any abuse of animals anywhere is Google's fault.

    It's a magical, instantaneous scapegoat for everything!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Nom du Clavier (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 3:33pm

      Re:

      That's not nearly absurd enough. Before Google you could blame Microsoft for providing the OS most people consume their internets from. Before them you could blame Intel and AMD for providing the processors. Before them you could blame the sand turned into silicon.

      Clearly they should blame the Earth, if not the entire universe. After all, these people do seem to argue that where reality disagrees with their point of view, reality is in the wrong.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Matthew (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 2:09pm

    The question is not...

    The question isn't what Smith & Wesson has done to prevent armed robbery, but more about what they have left to do.

    The question isn't what AstraZeneca has done to cure cancer, but more about what they have left to do.

    The question isn't what Halliburton has done to stabilize the situation in the Middle East, but more about what they have left to do.

    The question isn't what Ford has done to prevent accident fatalities, but more about what they have left to do.

    The question isn't what Citigroup has done to prevent risky investments and outright fraud from destroying the economy, but more about what they have left to do.

    The question isn't what tuna have done to ensure the health of the shark population, but what they have left to do.

    Anyone want to guess which of these similar formulations the reps would be willing to stand behind? I'd say 1 - sharks are covered by the ABA's lobbying arm.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 2:17pm

    I wish it were possible for there to be a Google-less month to show folks that the next exists and that even without Google, things don't just up and disappear.

    The line about determining what is or is not infringement is hampered on purpose by the entertainment industries themselves. You can't tell one from the next on which is or is not copyrighted by a file. Especially if the metadata was altered.

    The entertainment industries don't want to tell exactly which is which. It serves their purposes far better to hide it all. This is one of the reasons the http://www.riaaradar.com/ site, is to determine which songs and albums are or are not those belonging to the big 3 labels. There is no reasonable way to tell.

    The entertainment industries are milking this for all it's worth. They won't give you the names of albums and songs, they will instead sell you a filtering program they will control.

    So it looks here as if they are pushing their market again as the hidden agenda.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Apr 7th, 2011 @ 6:49am

      Re:

      riaaradar is an independent site that's not associated with the RIAA. It tries to independently tell you what the Riaa does and what they don't have 'rights' to. The RIAA is too lazy to even do that.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Apr 7th, 2011 @ 6:51am

        Re: Re:

        (well, the RIAA does have a list of member labels, but it hasn't been updated in years, since 2007).

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Apr 7th, 2011 @ 6:53am

          Re: Re: Re:

          and it's absurd to think that the RIAA can't even keep track of its own label members to display them on a website. If riaaradar can do it, and they're not even part of the RIAA, then the RIAA should be able to do it at a fraction of the price.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Apr 7th, 2011 @ 7:12am

          Re: Re: Re:

          I'm sorry, 2007 is when that site was put up on Wikipedia. The RIAA site actually hasn't been updated since 2003, but for some reason that information was taken down from Wikipedia since I last posted it.

          http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091014/0128436520.shtml#c373

          But this is pretty common knowledge anyways, the reason the RIAAradar site exists is because the RIAA never updates their website. Many people have complained that they're not (or that they're no longer) members and they're still incorrectly listed on the site, and many people who are now members aren't listed on that site because it hasn't been updated in so long.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    bob563, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 2:47pm

    WTF!

    Everybody with half a brain in their heads, and that surely includes our government, konws that anything that goes wrong on the internet is the work of either Microsoft or Google.

    Isn't it?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      bob563 (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 2:52pm

      Re: WTF! (oops)

      Everybody with half a brain in their heads, and that surely includes our government, knows that anything that goes wrong on the internet is the work of either Microsoft or Google.

      Isn't it?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 3:09pm

    Destroying My Searching....

    I am so sick and tired of all this ballyhoo about what google displays for results and what they don't.

    I miss the days where I could type in what I am searching for, and it would bring me back all sorts of strange and wonderful results. It was like peering into the brain of humanity, the weird, the gross, the funny, the serious, the entertaining...

    Now all I get are ads, and 'properly filtered results based on someone else's idea of what is legit and/or not infringing'.

    Well, screw your version of the Internet. I'm going back to my game, where we can invent/create/evolve/play/enjoy without someone demanding payment for every single little aspect.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Tom The Toe, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 3:30pm

    Re:Re:

    "Those layoffs at record labels because half of their revenue disappeared are real. Those are job losses."
    Maybe so, but not because of piracy. People don't want plastic discs anymore. They will pay for the content if someone will provide it in a useful format. Hint:Cds aren't it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The Devil's Coachman (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 4:48pm

      Re: Re:Re:

      Please don't shatter Zippy's delusion. The poor fellow will doubtless have to change his Depends as a result of that.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Apr 7th, 2011 @ 12:57am

      Re: Re:Re:

      All formats are available, and all songs are available to be previewed, anywhere on the net.

      Do you honestly think anyone falls for your BS?

      And you wonder how why the word 'Freetard' was invented for you? LOL

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Bengie, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 4:11pm

    Hmmm.

    A response like that from someone that high in the government should automatically enlist them into the Army as a private.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 5:49pm

    "Promoting Investment and Protecting Commerce Online: Legitimate Sites v. Parasites."

    The purpose of copy'right' isn't about promoting investment and protecting commerce, job creation and job security is not the governments job, the purpose of copy'right' is about promoting the progress. This is practically an admission that the legal system does not intend for copy'right' to promote the progress, but to protect industry profits.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    bob, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 6:40pm

    Massive profits

    I love how you exonerate Google simply because the AdSense ads don't produce "massive profits". What a cute way to jump over the fact that they do profit from the sites. Just claim that the profits aren't massive so move along now. Nothing to see here.

    And while I admit that Google's offer to monetize my video might be tempting because they're pretty talented at placing ads, I think it's more than a bit rude to offer the revenue afterwards. It's traditional to ask before taking.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      techflaws.org (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 11:10pm

      Re: Massive profits

      I love it how you try to paint Google as being unable to survive without those "massive" profits they allegedly make from these sites.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Apr 7th, 2011 @ 1:02am

      Re: Massive profits

      I think it's funny how these little droids have allowed themselves to be used as footsoldiers in more of the same when it comes to corporate greed.

      It's so obvious; it's like the classic dangling a lollipop in front of them...

      "Just promise them free music and they'll do whatever we want."

      You were so totally used.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Aerilus, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 8:51pm

    two words

    atlas shrugged

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 6th, 2011 @ 9:34pm

    Like in most other cases, when someone is making money, Congress wants to take said money. Google is making money, and therefore they are the target. There is no other reason.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    mike allen (profile), Apr 6th, 2011 @ 11:53pm

    time to find another search engine mmm not bling that even worse its micro$.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    -Silicon Valley Is Gonna Burn-, Apr 7th, 2011 @ 1:29am

    Mike Masnick Gets Owned By Floyd Abrams On Free Speech Issues

    Today marks the beginning of the end of Google as we know it, and I couldn't be happier.

    The tables have officially turned.

    -Silicon Valley Is Gonna Burn-

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The eejit (profile), Apr 7th, 2011 @ 3:45am

      Re: Mike Masnick Gets Owned By Floyd Abrams On Free Speech Issues

      You keep saying this, but part of the Internet's charm is that it's deigned to be reroutable.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The Devil's Coachman (profile), Apr 7th, 2011 @ 6:33am

      Re: Mike Masnick Gets Owned By Floyd Abrams On Free Speech Issues

      Ordinarily, I would simply call you an idiot, but that would be very offensive to actual idiots. You seem to have accomplished an order of magnitude increase in idiocy that presently is in need of a new term to describe it. I'm sure someone will come up with the answer soon.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Apr 7th, 2011 @ 6:16am

    "It's a simple question and no one answers it, other than to say, "it's obvious.""

    It is obvious though. Google needs to use the nuclear option. Ban search results containing content from RIAA, MPAA, etc. All search results that contain titles that match movie and album names. All websites mentioning TV shows, movies, and records from the labels. Remove all content from big content from YouTube.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Apr 7th, 2011 @ 7:57am

    Where is Microsoft in all of this?

    I can't find any reference to Bing being included in the hearings. Also no Yahoo, no Baidu. This actually seems like more of the same from microsoft, Microsofts unfair competition laws passed state by state, Microsofts EU harassment of google via the anti trust case and unfair competition complaint.

    I wonder if Bing and yahoo are going to be exempted from these laws when they are passed?

    Could the content industry and MS have gotten together to take on Google?

    If so it makes sense from MS's perspective not from the content industry perspective. MS like GE (think NBCU sale) probably has a good idea that the price of content to the consumer is going to zero. That the content monopoly bubble is going to crash over the next couple years.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This