While all non-compliant DMCA takedown notices are invalid by default, there’s a huge difference between those sent in error and others crafted for purely malicious purposes.

Bogus DMCA takedown notices are nothing new, but the rise of organized groups using malicious DMCA notices as a business tool has been apparent in recent years.

Since the vast majority of culprits facing zero consequences, that may have acted as motivation to send more. Through a lawsuit filed at a California court on Monday, Google appears to be sending the message that enough is enough.

Defendants Weaponized DMCA Takedowns

Google’s complaint targets Nguyen Van Duc and Pham Van Thien, both said to be residents of Vietnam and the leaders of up to 20 Doe defendants. Google says the defendants systematically abused accounts “to submit a barrage” of fraudulent copyright takedown requests aimed at removing their competitors’ website URLs from Google Search results.

“Defendants have weaponized copyright law’s notice-and-takedown process and used it not for its intended purpose of expeditiously removing infringing content, but instead to have the legitimate content of their competitors removed based on false allegations. Defendants’ illegal, fraudulent scheme harms consumers, third-party businesses, and Google; stifles competition; and threatens to tarnish Google’s trusted brand.”

Over the past few years, Nguyen, Pham and those working with them, are said to have created at least 65 Google accounts to send confirmed bogus notices targeting 117,000 URLs, plus another 500,000 URLs via notices that Google suspects are fraudulent too.

“Defendants appear to be connected with websites selling printed t-shirts, and their unlawful conduct aims to remove competing third-party sellers from Google Search results. Defendants have maliciously and illegally exploited Google’s policies and procedures under the DMCA to sabotage and harm their competitors,” the complaint adds.

Google Aims to Put an End to Abuse, Hold Defendants Accountable

Google goes on to highlight its position as a major intermediary that processes DMCA notices targeting 600 million URLs every year, and the requirement under the DMCA to remove or disable content notified as allegedly infringing. If the company fails to act expeditiously once in receipt of a DMCA notice that complies with the statutory requirements, the company risks losing its safe harbor protection, Google notes.

Since Google must often rely on the accuracy of statements made in DMCA notices, fraudulent notices can result in content being wrongfully taken down. That damages the company’s search engine advertising business, and the business Google’s customers hoped to attract. In this matter, the defendants’ embarked on a campaign that exploited Google’s systems and the DMCA takedown process to undermine their competitors.

Fake Names, Fraudulent Representations

The misrepresentations in notices sent to Google were potentially damaging to other parties too. Under fake names, the defendants falsely claimed to represent large companies such as Amazon, Twitter, and NBC News, plus sports teams including the Philadelphia Eagles, Los Angeles Lakers, San Diego Padres.

In similarly false notices, they claimed to represent famous individuals including Elon Musk, Taylor Swift, LeVar Burton, and Kanye West.

The complaint notes that some notices were submitted under company names that do not exist in the United States, at addresses where innocent families and businesses can be found. Google says that despite these claims, the defendants can be found in Vietnam from where they proudly advertise their ‘SEO’ scheme to others, including via YouTube.

“Bad actors like Defendants use this tactic to attack and fraudulently suppress competitors’ websites and products in Google Search results, making consumers more likely to buy the same or similar products from the bad actors or their affiliates,” the complaint continues.

“Such bad actors know that a fraudulent takedown request often has the same effect as a legitimate one; if a takedown request contains all the elements required under Section 512(c)(3)(A), it likely will trigger removal by Google.

“Unfortunately, to ensure compliance with the DMCA and in reliance on the information submitted in Defendants’ takedown requests, Google’s system removed a significant number of thirdparty website URLs targeted by Defendants for a period of time before Google and/or the websites’ owners figured out what was going on and took appropriate steps to reinstate the URLs.”

A particularly damaging batch of fraudulent notices targeted more than 35,000 URLs operated by a Google customer that spends tens of millions of dollars per year on Google search ads. The effect was a significant drop in traffic during the holiday season, revenue losses for the customer and its sellers of $5 million, and a loss to Google of between $2 and $3 million.

Holding Defendants Accountable

Those who knowingly make false statements in a DMCA notice can be held liable for damages, costs, and attorneys’ fees. In this matter the defendants’ conduct is said to have caused Google to suffer economic harm due to lost advertising revenue, damage to business relations, and the allocation of significant resources to investigate their wrongdoing.

Google seeks attorneys’ fees and damages under 17 U.S.C. §512(f) , in an amount to be determined at trial.

The complaint adds that when the defendants created dozens of Google accounts, each time they entered into enforceable agreements with Google. While Google says it has “performed all its obligations” under those contracts, the actions of the defendants amount to breaches of their contractual obligations to Google and intentional interference in contractual relationships between Google and its advertising customers.

Google says the defendants should be required to pay all general, special, and actual damages that Google “has sustained or will sustain” due to the fraudulent notices.

Google further requests an order to restrain the defendants (and anyone working in concert with them), from submitting any further fraudulent takedown notices and/or creating any Gmail accounts. Google also wants a ban on the defendants using any of its products or services to advertise their websites or products.

The complaint is available here (pdf)

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

“You’re talking about things I haven’t done yet, in the past tense. It’s driving me crazy. Are you sure you have the right person?”

Sarah Connor’s bewilderment in the 1984 masterpiece The Terminator is convincing. Important actions she was yet to take had already led to events happening in the future; the Terminator’s job was travel back from the future and stop her doing the stuff she hadn’t even done yet.

Determining the Future

Time travel never makes sense in movies and the text of the DMCA makes no attempt to address any takedown grievances a T-1000 may have experienced in 2029. It states that if a copyright holder sees their work being infringed online, they can send a notice that identifies the location of the content along with a request for its removal.

This would not have confused Sarah Connor. The alleged infringement happened and as per the DMCA, the content that can be seen in the present can be removed, so it’s not seen in the future. No time-traveling conundrums, just past, present and future, in one direction.

Proactive Help For Rightsholders

For some time, rightsholders have been submitting DMCA notices to Google that request the removal of URLs in Google’s search indexes that do not yet exist in Google’s search indexes. By default, these ‘DMCA’ notices are invalid; no infringement means there’s a) no content to locate and b) nothing to take down.

The caveat here is that Google is simply going the extra mile to help rightsholders. One example is the tendency of pirate site URLs to follow a formula; it’s possible to predict an infringing URL in advance, and when Google crawls it, it’s immediately flagged and never appears in search results. There are other examples, but it’s the intent that’s important.

Google recently revealed that it preemptively blocks hundreds of millions of URLs before they appear in its indexes. This isn’t required under law so referring to them as DMCA takedown notices is immediately problematic.

Crimes of the Future

Google’s web takedown form states that it’s company policy to “respond to legally valid copyright removal requests.” In addition, however, it also accepts notices that aren’t legally valid, at least under the DMCA.

“Search accepts notices for web pages that are not even in our index at the time of submission. Nevertheless, we will proactively block such web pages from appearing in our Search results and will apply these notices to our demotion signal,” the page reads.

Given that no infringement has taken place, what happens when people start making predictions about future infringements that never happen, or they decide to start sending bogus notices to ensure that sites are punished by preemptive blocking?

Future Blocking Warning

In a post to the /r/google community on Reddit yesterday, a user reported that they had received “many DMCA notices from Google regarding a pornography actor.”

The notification from Google, which clearly references the DMCA, notes that some of the reported URLs in the complaint may not actually be in its search results.

“Although some of these URLs may not be available in our search results now, we are retaining these notices and will act on them if at some point in the future we do crawl these pages for inclusion in search results,” the notice reads.

Problem #1: The Allegations Are Bogus

The DMCA notice posted by the Reddit user is listed on the Lumen Database ( link ). It claims to protect the rights of an OnlyFans/Instagram user but actually targets a policy page on the Reddit users’ site, a mobile phone store , another mobile phone store , and a meme page .

Only one URL hits an appropriate target, unless beach footwear qualifies.

The sender is identified as ‘Venus Group’ and according to Lumen Database records, it represents a long list of similar OnlyFans/influencer-type people.

In another notice listed on Lumen ( link ), a page on the Reddit user’s website selling smartphones is a target, along with a site selling a dog-feeding device , and a site selling a specialist alcoholic drink .

Whether the company received a similar warning about future piracy is unclear, but the same DMCA complaint also requests the removal of a Sony Pictures Publicity administration portal .

Problem #2: Doing Nothing Isn’t An Option

As Google’s notification explains, if URLs aren’t in its indexes now, as soon as it sees them there’s a reasonable chance they will never appear in its search results and the notices will form part of a demotion signal. So what are the options for those wrongfully targeted?

The suggestion from Google is to file a DMCA counter notice; Sarah is confused again.

On the basis that a DMCA notice may only reference an infringement that has actually happened and must state the current location of the infringing content, any notice that fails to do so is invalid.

Regardless of whether Google accepts infringement notices to enable it to respond proactively, how can a DMCA counternotice attempt to revoke an invalid DMCA notice that references allegedly infringing content that simply doesn’t exist in Google’s search results, but may appear sometime in the future?

This is one of the inevitable problems of letting people predict the future and mess around with the normal flowing of time. The logical progression from here is for people to get their DMCA counter notices in first, to counteract the bogus notices that haven’t been sent, referencing content that doesn’t exist.

If the past can change, then so can the future.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

From a single piece of handcrafted manga to an entire musical album, copyright law offers protection to all creators.

At least that’s the basic theory behind creators’ rights. The reality can be a somewhat less comforting and at times entirely more confusing experience.

Smaller Copyright Holders, Fewer Options

The truth is that the ability to act against infringers is often linked to a copyright holder’s resources. If hiring a lawyer isn’t a problem, most smaller disputes can be handled relatively quickly. Those with free time may be able to handle simple matters independently, but since copyright law is complex, even larger rightsholders will seek help at some point.

Through a new initiative launched this week, the Japanese government is offering free legal assistance to rightsholders who wish to protect their content from copyright infringement, especially when that infringement takes place overseas.

Portal For Copyright Infringment Countermeasures

The service enhances a project operated by Japan’s Agency for Cultural Affairs. The agency launched a new portal in June, which explains the basics of copyright law and enables those without experience to send takedown notices.

This week the Agency for Cultural Affairs expanded its support for local rightsholders with the launch of a new service to help those who have visited the portal, absorbed all of the available knowledge, but still require further assistance.

Anti-Piracy Consultation Desk

In recent years there has been a realization in Japan that overseas piracy represents a growing threat to local copyright holders. The Ministry for Cultural Affairs published a report in March detailing responses to cross-border piracy, including the establishment of a new consultation desk to assist rightsholders.

“The Consultation Desk accepts consultations regarding infringement of copyrights, etc. from rightsholders. Consultation is accepted from the consultation reception form on the portal site,” the official announcement reads .

“In principle, responses will be made by e-mail, and depending on the case, it is assumed that a free individual interview with an attorney will be held online or otherwise.”

Given that legal costs in copyright matters can be substantial, the provision of a free service will be appreciated by rightsholders, especially the smaller ones with fewer resources. Those who make use of the service will gain access to a network of 1,000 lawyers, including copyright specialists with experience of fighting piracy in Asia, North America and the EU.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.