Google Is Accused of Facilitating Piracy, AgainAdded: Friday, October 4th, 2013
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Current Events
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, www.extrattorrent.com, 2013
Google is again criticized by the UK MPs for failure to curb music and movie piracy. The Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee accused the tech giant of offering the thinnest of excuses to avoid taking action against widespread piracy. The government complaints that the problem costs the creative industry millions of pounds in lost revenue annually.
The MPs didn’t accept the explanations from Google that some of the “notorious” websites may also host legal content, and it therefore can’t block all of them. They called Google foremost among tech giants in being able to influence coalition policy-making and pointed out that they had received multiple complaints from across the creative industries about Google.
British MPs claimed that online pirates convicted of running commercial sites which rip off music, movies and video games should face up to 10 years in jail, up from the current maximum of 2 years. In response, Google claims that it does take down copyright-infringing content when it is notified of it. But it remains under the constant pressure from creative industry groups for moving too slowly or failing to take action.
Google revealed that it removed over 20 million links to pirated material from the search results in August 2013 alone. However, search itself is not the problem, because only 8% of infringers in the United Kingdom use Google to find illegal movies and 13% to find illegal music. The search giant is working harder than anyone to help the entertainment industry protect its content online.
The industry experts admit that the suggestion to raise the custodial penalty for piracy isn’t new. It was suggested in a private members bill many years ago, but was reignited in 2012 by the conviction of a site operator who was sentenced to 4 years in prison for running a website linking to pirated video.
The copyright owners claim that the creative industries are of huge importance to the UK economy, but it is put at risk if content creators can’t rely on a strong framework of intellectual property rights. The MPs claim that serious copyright infringers should be targeted with notifications without delay and urged the government to resolve the current impasse over the DEA by implementing the Online Copyright Infringement Code. The latter allows ISPs to send warnings to suspected copyright abusers.
October 4th,2013Posted by:
Friday, October 4th, 2013
|Why should Google spend their time and money doing the media industries job?? Google is in a thankless position and should tell them to piss off!|
|without google,yahoo ,microsoft and others infringing our right of privacy there would be no NSA policing since without their co-operation and filtering the spy network of the NSA would fall at the first hurdle.unfortunately failing to follow USA govt`s compliance notice`s would give Google no choice but to comply or shut down,the latter choice has already been taken by one or two of the encrypted email suppliers who have integrity,but billion dollar companies will never do this and so they facilitate the policing of the www for the NSA.|
|plus as we now know they are all part of PRISM and so puppets of the US govt and the NSA who are in turn controlled by the big corporations to the degree that if they cannot lawfully monitor and police content in the www then they will do it under the pretext of catching pedophiles and terrorists to protect our kids,funny how there is not a long list of terrorists and pedophiles being brought to justice when they have been doing this practice in the USA since 2007 under G.W.Bush and not stopping terrorists or pedos,s`all an excuse by the thought police (NSA/CIA) to control the www under their global cyber strategy BS.|
|just to give some perspective to the change in sentencing in regard the convicting for 10 years those that manage pirate sites it has to be said Killers in the UK can be released on license in the UK after 10 years imprisonment and such white collar theft should not rate a sentence of such a magnitude unless the police want to expect to get shot at by Hosts when they break down their doors.|
|How about they try to find the person who puts that very first copy of whatever, on the web in the first place.. That should keep 'em busy for a decade or two..|
|posted by (2013-10-06 03:38:37)|
|10 years isn't enough. After all you can get in a car pissed and kill someone and avoid a custodial sentance at all in the UK. Amanda Hutton who starved her child to death got 15 years. Downloading a cd should attract at least 20 years, lets keep a sense of perspective.|
|posted by (2013-10-06 15:17:34)|
|The fact is, that just as with any business there must be supply and demand, Google seriously isn't going to go all out and piss-off its consumer just to satisfy the UK Gov.|
As long as there's a need for free s*#t there will be someone somewhere prepared to supply it, Google or anyone else cant do a damn thin about it in the end. There's just too much momentum behind the pirates and not even the biggest anti piracy group/Government stands a chance of stemming the tide of the free download.
"what happened to the 'cheap seats', as in Shakespeare's Globe, we all need to laugh, cry, be entertained and informed.
Cameron should quit screwing around with Google search and focus more on Google's UK tax any way!
|Well said PAT!!!!!|
|posted by (2013-10-08 03:43:25)|
|I just don't buy in to the argument that piracy is costing the music,film and games industry the 10's of millions they claim.|
There argument has always been that if I download a pirated copy of a movie I am automatically denying the industry the either the cost of my cinema ticket or the money I would have used to purchase a DVD. Just because I am prepared to watch the movie from a free download does not mean that if the movie was not available as a pirated copy I would pay to see it. I would not in almost all cases. We all have only a set amount of disposable income. I still pay to go to the cinema, to see the movies that really interest me, if my budget allows. If a movie is not available to download I will simply do without, since my disposable income still remains the same.
|posted by (2013-10-09 11:25:45)|
|I seem to remember a survey result that bears out Mr_T_Cat's summary. In 2009, the highest grossing film in box offices around the world was James Cameron's Avatar. Quite surprisingly (or not, depending on your standpoint) this was also the most pirated and downloaded. Seemingly having no effect on box office takings at all. And along with Mr Cat I will also pay my money to go and see a film I really want to see at the cinema (though without going through the daylight robbery of the popcorn and drinks stand) as some films need to be seen on a big screen with all the bells and whistles.|
|posted by (2013-10-10 17:22:04)|
|When the govt. says it costs the creative industry millions of pounds in lost revenue annually what they mean is it costs the "government" millions in lost revenue because we pay VAT on dvds, blu rays, games and cd's and we're not buying them cos we download them. These are the same people who give tax breaks ( and other help to companies that want to make films in this country. Why not stop the tax breaks and quit worrying about the piracy, the money the govt. lose will be made up somewhere.|
Me, the wife and 3 kids under 8 went to see Turbo the other day at the cinema and it cost just under £43, cost to d/load from ET and watch it on the telly (52"), with popcorn, just under £3. ET........you rock.
|Now they're trying to blame Google search. Simple problem, make|
better movies that wroth going to the theater. It's a crying
shame with all these crappy TV shows and movies coming out lately.
Maybe one epic movie might come out once every two months.
|#11 colwobs, paying under £43 for a family of 5 is pretty cheap|
compare to New York and let alone paying $5 for a small popcorn.
|First off I do find it a bit silly to harass google over this, its a bit like claiming that Ford should take steps to stop their cars being used for ram raids|
secondly though, who really believes this story?
Google is reknowned and well publicised for openly and actively giving their entire data sets to the US government as well as altering aspects of their software to acquire information that the US government would otherwise need a court order or some degree of just cause to obtain themselves like location data from google maps. Facebook is another major data miner for the US (and possibly other) government(s)
So this could simply be a ruse to make people think google is a safe place to search for illegal downloads when infact its already established as being a primary data source for the FBI and NSA along with who knows what other governments and organisations
As for the HUGE amounts of money "lost" by the film and music industry can anyone anywhere actually provide ANY data to support that and the figures offered?
As an example suppose we have someone unemployed, or a student living on a bursary, or someone at school living with parents and nowadays even the countless families who JUST earn enough to pay their basic living costs
All of those have NO disposeable income, NONE of those are EVER likely to go to the cinema, purchase a film, buy a music CD or an original DVD not because they CAN get them illegally, but simply because they don't have the money to spend on any of them in the first place
The music industry would claim that if any of those people downloads 10 films with a cinema ticket price of lets say £5 that they have in that week "stolen" £50 when in fact they wouldn't at any point in that week or even in the previous month have had £5 let alone £50 to spend on anything except absolute necessities and as time goes on the amount of people in that position, even people in full time employment is increasing due to energy, rent, food and fuel price increases taking up pretty much all of their income
So the claimed theft isn't just exaggerated, embellisded and innacurate much of it is just completely ficticious and the delusions of a deficient mind as is the beliefs that what the recording industry is claiming is true because anyone but a total simpleton would know that their "model" for estimating loss and damage is near delusional with no link to reality whatsoever
|posted by (2013-10-18 03:25:15)|
|@ubermilk1967 finally someone with some real intelligence hits the nail on the head and all done in one single post lol|
|Well it is a bit like child protective services saying|
"If you have any young male children and you're worried about their safety the best place to leave them is in a catholic church"
When you think about it.....
Most Popular Stories