Here's all you need to know about Google's 'anti-piracy' attitude:

Sergey Brin: "when you go on a pirate website, you choose what you like; it downloads to the device of your choice and it will just work – and then when you have to jump through all these hoops [to buy legitimate content], the walls created are disincentives for people to buy.”

Source:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/15/web-freedom-threat-google-brin?commentpage=last#end-of-comments

...and:

Eric Schmidt: "If there is a law that requires DNSs to do X and it's passed by both houses of congress and signed by the president of the United States and we disagree with it then we would still fight it. [..] If it's a request the answer is we wouldn't do it, if it's a discussion we wouldn't do it"

Source:

http://www.fightpiracy.org/articles/eric-schmidt-google-will-fight-anti-piracy-efforts-and-not-block-access-to-illegal-copyright-infringing-pirate-sites-like-pirate-bay.html

...also, it's priceless to see Google admit 2.5 million copyright crimes every week and then blame the victims for trying to stop them.

Most DMCA requests are completely spurious and without merit. Studios and labels have automated systems throwing them out, sometimes requesting removal of content that the studio or label themselves uploaded.

"Most DMCA requests are completely spurious and without merit."

97.5% of the alleged copyright crimes are valid.

That's why Google take the URLs down. If they didn't, somebody would take them down, you see...

Not really saying much. A copyright infringement notice is considered "valid" if the studio spelled its name correctly. It's very rare for these things to be actually go through any kind of conventional judicial process, because apperently having an actual justice system around copyright is too difficult.

"apperently having an actual justice system around copyright is too difficult"

Really?

Go ask Diebold who had to pay $125,000 for sending an unsubstantiated takedown request...

I love it!

The one tniy little bit of the DMCA that copyright holders can use to protect their digital works is the one thing that Google wants politicians to alter or remove.

My minions are on K street right now yanking the chains and greasing the wheels to make sure Google gets what it wants.

"The one tiny little bit of the DMCA that copyright holders can use to protect their digital works is the one thing that Google wants politicians to alter or remove."

Yes, this is the strongest attack on literature, movies, art and music since McCarthy.

Are you now or have you ever been a copyright holder?

Total Criminalization - It's the only way the future wil "work."

Google gets tired of playing by the rules - even rules that favor it.

We have clearly completely lost control of music. Because of this, time to change all copyright laws to reflect the need for compulsory licensing on all levels and in all categories of the business. If I could legally "sell" music to my friends, we could all share music legally and pay the same amount that spotify pays per stream to labels from our own bank accounts/cards. We could also be creating publicity for new music, we would all be curating music for eachother, and everyone would get paid. If instead of getting rid of online music sharing we embraced it with a new industry-wide system that put the power in the hands of the consumers, everything would be different. Who needs amazon or iTunes when I can give you the track and you can decide to share it legally, pay a small "sharing fee" to the artist/label for it directly... much better system. Meanwhile they digital industry will fall apart without any changes...

Streaming is the future. Your idea is completely impractical and sounds like a lot of work for everyone involved.

"Streaming is the future"

For hobbyists, yes.

90% or more of music consumers are "hobbyists" if by hobbyist you mean listen daily but purchase less than $50 a year in product.

I'm talking about artists, not consumers. :)

good point!

can anyone comment on what google's actual procedure for investigation and takedown of illegal content is? 3.5 million pulldowns a week? This cannot be done by humans at that rate, right?

Now that would really be something I would want to hear google's leagl counsel comment on; If the DMCA were ammended to say that each takedown request had to be researched, deliberated and administered by a real human being.

One of the reasons the DMCA is so broken is it allows people to take stuff off the Internet without any need to provide evidence of infringement at all. Imagine if stores can steal your wallet if they simply thought you were shoplifting, and you have the state of copyright enforcement today. How the hell Congress thought this was a good idea is beyond me.

"One of the reasons the DMCA is so broken is it allows people to take stuff off the Internet without any need to provide evidence of infringement at all."

Don't worry, there are harsh penalties for people who take legitimate stuff down so that's a non-issue.

The problem with the DMCA is the safe harbor concept, mainly because it allows Google to make money from stolen property until the owner reports the crime.

2.5 million requests per WEEK.

Yes, the current DMCA is absurd. It's time to reconsider the safe harbor.

"It's OK to steal from you 'cause we give it back as soon as you find out."

A company shouldn't be allowed to profit from this millions of times each week.

This style of headline is really deceptive, disappointing, and pathetic. It makes it sound like I'm about to read an op-ed that was written by Google's Legal Director, but instead it's mostly just a copy/paste with some of your own commentary sprinkled in.

You write headlines like this a lot. It's unprofessional. Please stop it.

I agree it can be a bit tricky to figure out who's saying what sometimes. Weird font sizes and styles don't make it easier.

But 'deceptive, disappointing, and pathetic'? :)

Sometimes I think Digital Music News is the ex-boyfriend of some of these commenters.

Google likes evil people.

This lawyer used to work for Morrison & Foerster.

Hey, some of my best friends work there.

I am sure google's "legal director" would like to ask "Who thought up this whole transparency thing anyway?"

DMCA is nothing. Too much burden of effort on the copyright holders, and absolutely no penalty to the infringers. 

DMCA is not even a slap on the wrist. What's needed is a hammer.

- V

"DMCA is not even a slap on the wrist. What's needed is a hammer."

Agree, Google made money from linking to more than 50 million criminal files in 2012:

http://torrentfreak.com/google-removed-50-million-pirate-search-results-this-year-121228/

That could be 1 billion infringements next year.

Google's Safe Harbor abuse has turned the company into a new Pirate Bay.