Author Topic: Fox Sends DMCA Takedown To Google To Remove Link To DMCA Takedown Sent By Fox (Read 16,006 times)

wraith808 · « **on:** March 10, 2011, 06:19 PM »

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110307/13101613388/fox-sends-dmca-takedown-to-google-to-remove-link-to-dmca-takedown-sent-fox.shtml

I can't stop laughing at this! It shows just *how* overzealous they are... it seems that takedown notices now breed from this example...

worstje · « **Reply #1 on:** March 10, 2011, 06:36 PM »

Careful, now mouser is going to receive a DMCA for linking to an article discussing multiple Fox DMCA notices that in part involve other DMCA notices. We'll need a second fundraiser if that happens just to deal with the lawsuits, and then we'll end up receiving another notice and/or lawsuit for 'making money' based on their property.

Gotta love lawyers. Even if I am proven to be wrong, I am going to be damn close to the truth either way.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #2 on:** March 10, 2011, 06:54 PM »

Nice of them to list all of the links to be taken down in the take-down notice ... One-stop shopping anyone...

mahesh2k · « **Reply #3 on:** March 10, 2011, 08:22 PM »

So fox site's results are going to get stripped out from the search now ?

JavaJones · « **Reply #4 on:** March 11, 2011, 04:53 AM »

Quote from: rupak447 on March 11, 2011, 03:03 AM

Hm, the cause of your non stop laugh is not in vain at all. Here the reasons of taking down the notice isn't clear at me. But, there's the way to strip up it by receiving the DCMA and mouser is ready to do it.

I dare say this fellow will be writing Shakespeare soon enough!

- Oshyan

Renegade · « **Reply #5 on:** March 11, 2011, 09:04 AM »

That was simply amazing!

This article has a few interesting bits/twists:

http://www.techeye.net/internet/fox-tries-to-censor-its-own-censorship

Quote

Confusing isn't it? This is because Fox's lawyers are in a perpetual legal loop trying to use the DMCA to shut up Chilling Effects and have not worked out that they are simply creating more Chilling Effects posts.

40hz · « **Reply #6 on:** March 11, 2011, 01:23 PM »

It was so much easier in the good old days when people with a mindset like Fox could just burn books; and round up everyone they didn't like and put them in camps for "rehabilitation." Spanking' uniforms they wore too. And it was pretty "fair & balanced" treatment I understand. Everybody was equally subject to being arrested at whim.

Doesnt get any fairer than that.

Now they have to go to court and file papers and lawsuits. What a hassle.

FoxNews Prevails! $:-\$

mahesh2k · « **Reply #7 on:** March 11, 2011, 02:32 PM »

Quote

Hm, the cause of your non stop laugh is not in vain at all. Here the reasons of taking down the notice isn't clear at me. But, there's the way to strip up it by receiving the DCMA and mouser is ready to do it.

Okay, is there any change in TOFEL's standards lately ?

bob99 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 11, 2011, 02:48 PM »

Quote from: 40hz on March 11, 2011, 01:23 PM

Now they have to go to court and file papers and lawsuits. What a hassle.

It's called billable hours = $$$$$$$
IMO whether the reason it is legitimate or not, win or lose it's still $$$$$$$

40hz · « **Reply #9 on:** March 11, 2011, 03:10 PM »

I know an attorney that would agree. He says: Justice has it's place in the courtroom. But right, wrong, or indifferent - in the end it's all billable time.

In his defense, he says that to discourage clients who are super gung-ho to file lawsuits he considers without merit. Known this attorney for years. He's an honorable guy. He'd be a lot richer - and probably retired and sitting in a beach house on Nantucket if he were a little less honorable.

bob99 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 11, 2011, 03:27 PM »

+1 to this gentleman. This philosophy makes him a credit to his profession and is due the respect. It is the "other side" which I unfortunately have had dealings with that get my goat. Anyway, didn't mean to get off topic. Just had to put my $0.02 in.

wraith808 · « **Reply #11 on:** March 11, 2011, 03:47 PM »

Q: What's the difference between a bad lawyer and a good lawyer?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

A: A bad lawyer can drag a case out for years. A good lawyer can make it go even longer!

fenixproductions · « **Reply #12 on:** March 11, 2011, 06:34 PM »

Code

public void CheckDMCA()
{
	if (Google.Results.Contains("DMCA takedown"))
	{
		SendMail.To("Google");	
		CheckDMCA();
	}
}

40hz · « **Reply #13 on:** March 11, 2011, 09:01 PM »

Quote from: wraith808 on March 11, 2011, 03:47 PM

Q: What's the difference between a bad lawyer and a good lawyer?

The US Center for Disease Control has announced they will no longer be using rats in their scientific research. Going forward, all experiments will be conducted using attorneys.

Reason

The reason for this change in protocol is threefold.

After an extensive study, the CDC concluded that:

1. Attorneys are easily bought, and available in almost unlimited supply.

2. Close observation has proven beyond any doubt that they are completely indifferent to pain and suffering.

3. The CDC occasionally conducts behavioral studies. And when it comes to individual behaviors, there are some which are so dirty, and utterly disgusting, that a rat will flat out refuse to do them.

Renegade · « **Reply #14 on:** March 11, 2011, 09:08 PM »

Quote from: fenixproductions on March 11, 2011, 06:34 PM

Code

public void CheckDMCA()
{
	if (Google.Results.Contains("DMCA takedown"))
	{
		SendMail.To("Google");	
		CheckDMCA();
	}
}

Nice!

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #15 on:** March 11, 2011, 09:15 PM »

4. Labratory staff occasionally get attached to the rats...

Quote from: 40hz on March 11, 2011, 09:01 PM

Quote from: wraith808 on March 11, 2011, 03:47 PM
Q: What's the difference between a bad lawyer and a good lawyer?

The US Center for Disease Control has announced they will no longer be using rats in their scientific research. Going forward, all experiments will be conducted using attorneys.

The reason for this change in protocol is threefold.

After an extensive study, the CDC concluded that:

1. Attorneys are easily bought, and available in almost unlimited supply.

2. Close observation has proven beyond any doubt that they are completely indifferent to pain and suffering.

3. The CDC occasionally conducts behavioral studies. And when it comes to individual behaviors, there are some which are so dirty, and utterly disgusting, that a rat will flat out refuse to do them.

4. Labratory staff occasionally get attached to the rats...

wraith808 · « **Reply #16 on:** March 11, 2011, 09:33 PM »

Hey! My post disappeared!

Quote from: 40hz on March 11, 2011, 09:01 PM

Quote from: wraith808 on March 11, 2011, 03:47 PM
Q: What's the difference between a bad lawyer and a good lawyer?

The US Center for Disease Control has announced they will no longer be using rats in their scientific research. Going forward, all experiments will be conducted using attorneys.

I might not be able to out-pun chris, but surely I can out-joke you...

Q: What's the problem with lawyer jokes?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

A: Lawyers don't think they're funny, and no one else thinks they're jokes!

Deozaan · « **Reply #17 on:** March 11, 2011, 10:17 PM »

Quote from: 40hz on March 11, 2011, 03:10 PM

I know an attorney that would agree. He says: Justice has it's place in the courtroom.

A Supreme Court Justice would disagree: "This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice." - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

40hz · « **Reply #18 on:** March 12, 2011, 01:57 AM »

Quote from: Deozaan on March 11, 2011, 10:17 PM

Quote from: 40hz on March 11, 2011, 03:10 PM
I know an attorney that would agree. He says: Justice has it's place in the courtroom.

A Supreme Court Justice would disagree: "This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice." - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

I think he meant it in the same way a 13th century baron believed a lively and ongoing debate about the rights of his tenants had a place in village discourse. And that place was up on a scaffold, begging for mercy, with a hangman in attendance.

---------

re: Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. - Interesting guy. And a colorful S.C. Justice. But way too cynical for his (or our) own good at times.

This was the same judge that authored the majority opinion in a case (Buck v Bell) supporting a State's right to sterilize someone deemed an "imbecile" (i.e. mental capabilities below what was deemed an acceptable level of intelligence) against their will. He justified his decision by closing with this less frequently quoted statement:

Three generations of imbeciles are enough.

Less than 20 years later, justices from the United States, along with their counterparts from Britain, France, and the Soviet Union would sentence Dr Karl Brandt, Viktor Brack, and seven other Nazi officials to death for their role in the infamous "T4" euthanasia program. T4 documented and systematically murdered somewhere around 200,000 physically or mentally handicapped people deemed unfit to live in human society.

Apparently some other people shared Justice Holmes pragmatic vision of how to make a more perfect world.

Nice to see the rest of the world was a bit more interested in justice than in the letter of law.

40hz · « **Reply #19 on:** March 12, 2011, 02:52 AM »

Quote from: wraith808 on March 11, 2011, 09:33 PM

I might not be able to out-pun chris,

Few can.

Quote

but surely I can out-joke you...

Most do.

wraith808 · « **Reply #20 on:** March 12, 2011, 03:58 AM »

Quote from: Deozaan on March 11, 2011, 10:17 PM

Quote from: 40hz on March 11, 2011, 03:10 PM
I know an attorney that would agree. He says: Justice has it's place in the courtroom.

A Supreme Court Justice would disagree: "This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice." - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

There are two types of lawyers. Those that know the law, and those that know the judge.

cranioscopical · « **Reply #21 on:** March 12, 2011, 05:56 AM »

There are two types of lawyer. Those who appeal and those who do not.

Deozaan · « **Reply #22 on:** March 12, 2011, 10:15 AM »

There are two types of lawyer, but nobody likes lawyers enough to get to know the difference.