*DISCUSSION* Google Lawsuit A Major Problem Solver For Illegal Tubes and Piracy?

[DavieVegas]

If I am not making much sense on a few things, dont harp on me I have had a few drinks lol but it could not wait until tomorrow. This on-going piracy issue has plenty of players that can be help responsible but a main one I was told can be "google" along with any search engine for that matter. I asked this question to a few lawyers who my wealthy uncle knows because both are family friends and have been since I was maybe 12. They asked me how biz was and I told them for 2 hours about the illegal tubes and how they cant be touched because of hosting in different countries and plenty other reasons yada yada as well as upload services that hold pirated content like rapidshare along with many many different companies to be used for piracy along with the tubes and I was told some interesting things tonight.

To sum it up, this is what they both told me!

"Google and any search engine for that matter is a liable entity. Id like to see someone present this to google because believe it or not. Google IS and CAN be HELD responsible/liable for what they have in there search engine. They are suppose to be monitoring it just like any other site. They are able to blacklist sites right? penalize sites as well? Exactly my point. Because of all the pirated material on these illegal tubes, they can also be taken out(SE traffic wise by google banning them or blacklisting them) by going after google since they are so HEAVILY reliant on google SE traffic for keywords porn and free porn. If people would only get the balls to chip in instead of bitching, maybe everyone in this industry could take out these key problems by going after what people consider the untouchable "google".

Now since tube sites rely on ads for profit mainly, taking out there SE would destroy there traffic along with profits no? So much bandwidth that they pay for and without making much profit would make them have no reason to continue. I had a very long talk with these lawyers and brought everything up and like I always thought, google plays a Big hand in this lawsuit wise. PIRACY is now the key term here which is taking money away from everyone almost. Not to mention the MAIN reason in my opinion why the porn industry is in such bad shape. FREE PORN. Now i don't own paysite's and its not affecting me "content wise or income wise" but I asked all this and decided to post for EVERYONE that it does affect. Id be willing to give money towards this cause for the right lawyer to do this. My family friend lawyers said they would look into it if need be. Plenty other things and responsible parties also including hosts as well. Figured id share and would make a good discussion. I'm sick of seeing tube threads also but I couldn't hold my breath if this could somehow help.

If anyone has good lawyers, please bring this up to them and let me know what they say from another perspective. Thanks.

[DavieVegas]

Off to bed, I will check this thread in the morning... Eager to see everyone's opinions and responses.

[JD]

i blame gansta rap and mary-jew-wanna

[SleazyDream]

remove google and a HUGE chunk of their traffic dries up

[Why]

well it would be interesting to watch someone try to take on google over the matter. go for it!

[benwillems3]

what about banners and direct traffic. i think tube sites like pornhub/tube8 are hitting 60/70% direct traffic.

I bet there's over 70% of bookmark traffic right now to the tube sites .. but it would be great to get them out of the top search engine positions for lots of keywords

[Hentaikid]

Cat's out of the bag, word of mouth and bookmarks would still send them traffic

[PastorSinAlot]

dreaming

[Agent 488]

good luck with that.

[DavieVegas]

Originally Posted by SleazyDream

remove google and a HUGE chunk of their traffic dries up

This is true!

[DavieVegas]

Originally Posted by Gasper

I bet there's over 70% of bookmark traffic right now to the tube sites .. but it would be great to get them out of the top search engine positions for lots of keywords

I have been around in the free site market for over 8 years now and granted my niche is not hardcore but I know the biggest babe site owners and even in there prime when babe sites were new, they never recieved 70% of bookmark traffic daily etc. My point is the keyword for "porn" and "free porn" brings in disgusting amounts of SE traffic daily. end of story. Yes, even if they lost those keywords, they would have traffic but def not what they are getting daily

[hjnet]

SE Traffic -> Sales++
Bookmark Traffic -> Bandwidth Bill++

[DavieVegas]

I just wonder how much money it would cost to get together to fight this. Thats a HUGE question mark.

[potter]

How do you plan on holding Google liable? All they do is link to websites. They don't host or commit copyright infringement.

I'm just wondering on what premise exactly you would sue google over copyright infringement?

[DavieVegas]

Originally Posted by potter

How do you plan on holding Google liable? All they do is link to websites. They don't host or commit copyright infringement.

I'm just wondering on what premise exactly you would sue google over copyright infringement?

All they do? They are a earch engine. According to lawyers they control and oversee what is put on there search engine. They have the right to blacklist sites and ban sites for any reason but not do the same for piracy issues or other unlawful acts? They are also based in the U.S and therefore under U.S law. That's like saying I started youtube and i am not held liable to what is uploaded. You would sue google not for money but for not properly watching what they allow to be put up. This case would be bring up a lawsuit to scare them into policing there search engines because they are liable for copyright infringement tubes/sites that is making money etc. This also goes for incest/beastality. It does not matter which sites are based overseas etc SE wise. They are held responsible for what they put up on there search engine. Google is the main source here from what I'm told and it makes all the sense in the world. Let me say again, this case would not be to make money by suing google, but to have a impact on these sites/other stuff like rapidshare and places you can uploaded pirated content as well. I just dont understand why rapidshare/any other uploading companies even get placed as a link on google and get SE from it? This was there point. Makes 0 sense and someones gotta be help responsible and it this case its google. Just what i was told.

[potter]

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

All they do? They are a earch engine. According to lawyers they control and oversee what is put on there search engine.

Yes, they do but they aren't required by any law to black list a site because the site might be under copyright infringement. The point being, Google is not infringing on any copyright, the website they list is. It's not illegal for Google to list them

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

They have the right to blacklist sites and ban sites for any reason but not do the same for piracy issues or other unlawful acts?

Same point as above.

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

They are also based in the U.S and therefore under U.S law.

They aren't breaking any law. Plus, you're talking about copyright infringement not breaking a law.

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

That's like saying I started youtube and i am not held liable to what is uploaded.

No it's not. Youtube isn't linking to another site with the video. They are hosting the video, and that video is apart of their site. This is not the case with Google.

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

You would sue google not for money but for not properly watching what they allow to be put up.

They're not putting content up though. They're only linking to the website. There is no breach of copyright. Even if the site they link to might be under copyright infringement, google is not.

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

This case would be bring up a lawsuit to scare them into policing there search engines because they are liable for copyright infringement tubes/sites that is making money etc.

I see no case. If you can name what you would sue Google over, or how you could possible try to sue them for copyright infringement. I mean, where is the copyright infringement? Point it out and you might have a case.

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

This also goes for incest/beastality.

No, because that is illegal. It's very different.

[potter]

Trying to sue Google over listing a site that has violated a copyright. Is like trying to sue someone for copyright infringement when they merely gave directions to a video store and then store clerk and customer committed copyright infringement.

You could sue the store clerk, and the customer - but not the guy that gave directions to the store - he didn't commit copyright infringement.

The case just isn't there it would get thrown out.

[DavieVegas]

Like I said, the lawyers I spoke to know what they would go after them about. I didnt discuss the exact way they would do it but they are liable. Everything you sai dmakes sense but google is basically harboring these sites which are making millions off of copyrighted content which is stealing. If they are not held responsible then you cant hold the government responsible for anything they do in a sense either which is bs.

[Agent 488]

you sound as sad as your avatar : )

[DavieVegas]

lol this is a discussion for people this affects. I dont deal with content or anything. I did the thread for people and opinions Mr Agent man!

[potter]

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

Like I said, the lawyers I spoke to know what they would go after them about. I didnt discuss the exact way they would do it but they are liable.

Well, I highly suspect the lawyers you talked to to be full of it.

All google does is link to stuff. Linking - is not copyright infringement. It's just not. No lawyer on this planet could prove otherwise. IF anyone did, it would be in direct violation of the first amendment and the internet would cease to exist.

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

Everything you sai dmakes sense but google is basically harboring these sites

Linking to a website isn't harboring. Harbor means to give refuge or shelter to, this is not in any way what Google is doing.

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

which are making millions off of copyrighted content which is stealing. If they are not held responsible then you cant hold the government responsible for anything they do in a sense either which is bs.

I don't know how the government can be compared to this situation? But Google is not making millions off copyrighted content, nore are they stealing anything. They simply link. Linking to something is not the same as stealing.


btw: I'm in no way trying to be an ass here. This type of stuff is just a huge interest to me (the legality of the internet and the laws inherit to it). So I'm only trying to debate the idea.

[Basic_man]

Bump for the industry !

[DavieVegas]

I understand potter but if they are not responsible then how do you explain this?

http://torrentfreak.com/google-remov...esults-091002/

"Removing search results is nothing new for Google. The company has been cleaning up its search results for years, following up on complaints from the Chinese government, and of course copyright holders."

Now im NOT SAYING SUE GOOGLE for money, but if you bring this to them with a intent to go after them to remove these copyright infringement sites links wise on google you def have a case. As you can see above. This is a perfect example for torrent sites getting placement on google which holds pirated content/applications etc. They should not be getting placement at all. They are not sites, they are uploaded links. No what I mean?

[marketsmart]

[DavieVegas]

My sister use to dance her ass off to that damn song. It was like vanilla ice for me. YES I SAID IT lol.

[marketsmart]

[marketsmart]

[PornMD]

Sure, Google can take down sites - sites that are blatantly illegal like CP. How are you going to argue that Google would know to take down a PornHub? How is Google supposed to know that PornHub doesn't have license to the content on it, especially when there are tube sites out there that have license to use ALL the content on them (legal tubes)? How deep is Google supposed to get involved to figure out if a site is illegal and should be removed, especially in a non-mainstream arena like porn? Heck, how is Google supposed to remove them for illegal content when no one has successfully won a lawsuit against them (PornHub et al) for what they're doing? Or here's the best question of them all: How would anyone in existence expect Google to take PornHub et al out of their results when PornHub et al state that users upload any of the illegal content on them, which is exactly what YouTube, a site Google OWNS, claims regarding the exact same thing?

Shit, I'm not even a lawyer and know to bring up these questions. I don't think your lawyer buddies thought it through very much.

[SleazyDream]

Originally Posted by hjnet

SE Traffic -> Sales++
Bookmark Traffic -> Bandwidth Bill++

for tubes - this is very true

[SleazyDream]

Originally Posted by PornMD

Sure, Google can take down sites - sites that are blatantly illegal like CP. How are you going to argue that Google would know to take down a PornHub? How is Google supposed to know that PornHub doesn't have license to the content on it, especially when there are tube sites out there that have license to use ALL the content on them (legal tubes)? How deep is Google supposed to get involved to figure out if a site is illegal and should be removed, especially in a non-mainstream arena like porn? Heck, how is Google supposed to remove them for illegal content when no one has successfully won a lawsuit against them (PornHub et al) for what they're doing?

Shit, I'm not even a lawyer and know to bring up these questions. I don't think your lawyer buddies thought it through very much.

you inform google

[DavieVegas]

Originally Posted by SleazyDream

you inform google

Exactly! This is exactly why you bring this to there attention in forms of a lawsuit. This will get there eyes open.

[potter]

Originally Posted by DavieVegas

I understand potter but if they are not responsible then how do you explain this?

http://torrentfreak.com/google-remov...esults-091002/

"Removing search results is nothing new for Google. The company has been cleaning up its search results for years, following up on complaints from the Chinese government, and of course copyright holders."

Now im NOT SAYING SUE GOOGLE for money, but if you bring this to them with a intent to go after them to remove these copyright infringement sites links wise on google you def have a case. As you can see above. This is a perfect example for torrent sites getting placement on google which holds pirated content/applications etc. They should not be getting placement at all. They are not sites, they are uploaded links. No what I mean?

http://www.macworld.com/article/1431...piratebay.html

Google put TPB back into it's index.

[potter]

Originally Posted by SleazyDream

you inform google

Inform them of what? Copyright infringement is a civil matter.

Google would have no reason to get involved with a copyright infringement case and removing links unless it was an actual legal case that was proven to be criminal infringement in a court of law.

[fatfoo]

Originally Posted by JD

i blame gansta rap and mary-jew-wanna

Yeah, sometimes I blame that too. Great.

[Jel]

1. Torrents are different to tubes, torrents don't directly host any content, whereas tubes do. Make a difference?
2. Why do you see a link to chillingeffects on some google serps, with words to the effect that google has removed a listing due to a dmca if they are merely linking to a page, where something may or may not be illegal?

My genuine questions, be interested in thoughts/replies.

[Jel]

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ

Ya, that's right hold Google responsible. Give them more control on what we can or can't view? Google is a private Company and not a governing body and they have the (as you mentioned) "right" to list or not. This does not make them responsible for the actions of web site owners. The web site owners and the surfers are the ones guilty here.

It's people like you that makes more regulations for the rest of us because of your distorted thinking. Whats next, you going to sue automakers because they supplied a vehicles that was used to and from a crime?

You need to be more concerned with the fact that Icann has bent to international pressure and possibly surrendering much of its control. You think things are bad now? Things will be much worse if the UN governs anything..

So thepiratebay are good in your book yeah? They are a private company not a governing body and as such are free to list which torrents are being seeded/leeched, as they aren't actually responsible for any actions of PC users

[Tom_PM]

Right now I could go out to my street and fire weapons wildly into the air. No really, I COULD do that. However it's quite illegal and there is no doubt whatsoever that I would go to jail once I was caught. BUT, if nobody ever complained, and/or nobody ever arrested people for it, then it would happen every single day without fail exactly like the wild west.

Regulate. Enforce. Deter.

[DavieVegas]

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

Right now I could go out to my street and fire weapons wildly into the air. No really, I COULD do that. However it's quite illegal and there is no doubt whatsoever that I would go to jail once I was caught. BUT, if nobody ever complained, and/or nobody ever arrested people for it, then it would happen every single day without fail exactly like the wild west.

Regulate. Enforce. Deter.

Could not of said it better myself! My point exactly and no one is complaining to key players with this in any form, so it will continue until porn is obsolete because its given away in disgusting amounts and forms daily. I just mentioned one of plenty major players involved in this.

Complain to google either by lawsuit or anyway else, they should take down or ban ANYTHING links wise that are performing illegal acts which intent is irreputable harm going on on there search engine. Includes torrent etc. Not hard to ban links on google im sure with there so called "cleaning up there search engine for years" quote.

You guys say google is not responsible for what websites do, they only link the sites but they are still LINKING the sites and therefore basically being apart of the reasons these sites are making huge profits from piracy and others. By bringing this to there attention only makes them have to make another option in terms of complaints for serious accusitions to be further looked into with the websites they link. SE is GOLD and everyone knows it, so to say that its not WORTH bringing this to there attention is idiotic.