Google got over 50 million URL removal requests in 2012

In May, Google announced that its public transparency report would start including requests from various parties to remove website URLs from its search results. At that time, Google was getting about 1.2 million URL removal requests a month.

While Google has not yet offered up its own official year-end numbers, TorrentFreak has gone back and done some number crunching on its own. They claim that so far for 2012, Google has received requests to remove 51,395,353 URLs from its search results.

The numbers also show that the amount of requests has continued its upward spiral. As you can see in the chart above, those numbers began to go way up around May. The article states that last week, Google received requests to remove a whopping 3,502,345 URLs from its results. That number is 15 times the amount the company got per week at the beginning of the year.

It's not a surprise to learn that the Recording Industry Association of America is the number one source for these requests. Google's numbers show that in 2012, they were responsible for 7,816,766 URL takedown requests. The file hosting search engine website FilesTube was the one that got the most takedown requests in the past year, with 2,273,280 separate URLs targeted.

Source: TorrentFreak | Image via TorrentFreak

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Rumor: AMD to ditch its VISION branding in 2013?

Next Story

Sony's PlayStation 2 to be discontinued in Japan: Is this (finally) goodbye?

13 Comments

hehe... I still find it amusing

We have to remember, that while take downs are sent to google, the actual webpages are still there and they're just not indexed by google's search engine anymore. The removed results are all included in a few text files that are free to download with the transparency report. It's like a one stop for everything illegal, its almost like the DMCA notices are making it easier for people to find the content that should be removed.

Still, I did notice a few weird take down notices. Such as one where a DMCA was sent in because a copied news article was ranked higher then the original's site.. o_O they didn't even cite plagiarism in the request.

sagum said,
hehe... I still find it amusing

We have to remember, that while take downs are sent to google, the actual webpages are still there and they're just not indexed by google's search engine anymore. The removed results are all included in a few text files that are free to download with the transparency report. It's like a one stop for everything illegal, its almost like the DMCA notices are making it easier for people to find the content that should be removed.

Still, I did notice a few weird take down notices. Such as one where a DMCA was sent in because a copied news article was ranked higher then the original's site.. o_O they didn't even cite plagiarism in the request.


That's not my point.
I'm worried about all the increased effort.
Attempts at censorship, no matter whether on the search front or a website takedown are not that much apart in terms of ideology.

I'm mostly worried about the intent and where it might get to one day.
I'm really not worried as much about the actual practical result as it is right now although I do find that censorship is awful.

GS:mac

I understand where you're coming from now.

Having scraped a lot of p2p and releases on usenet in the past, just for fun, I can see how easy it would be to do simple filter searches and automat the DMCA take downs to popular indexing sites.
One step a head of that, and you have your own spiders looking for your filtered content and them check the results on popular search engines, google, bing, yahoo etc and send the DMCA notice in an automated way. The only human assistance would be verifying they takedown would be legit. Once setup, the actual amount of effort is very minimal.


https://www.google.com/transpa...ght/reporters/?r=last-month
A lot of the top take down requests come from the bigger companies with a lot of copyright owners under their belt, but most interestingly is the likes of DtecNet who provide software like I've just talked about. It wouldn't be too far fetched to suggest that they've licensed their software to the other companies and that's why we're seeing the increase in takedowns. If that is true, then the amount of effort required would be signing the order form for the server boxes to bet setup and a few staff verify the results.
I'm guessing the intent is to sell the search and filer software to the media giants under the pretence that it'll help them get rid of piracy on the internet.. and we know how easy they fall for technology false-hoods.

So at the end of the day, their might only be a slight practical result when it comes to 'cleaning up' visual aspects of places like Google from showing what is being pirated, but for actually stopping piracy not so much. It's still going on, the agencies are just pushing forward with it, hoping people don't find it simply by searching Google.

Most site owners that monitor their hits will know when they've had a DMCA notice attached to their URL, as the hits will drop off with in hours, so they could just repost/change the URL. Cat and mouse event starts then.

We've already had a lot of domains blocked in the UK and while I don't pirate content myself, I still think censorship is bad. I was trying to get a game working a few weeks back and the 'fix' was in the comments on the results of the pirate bay, blocked in the UK by default. So I just used Google cache.
I'm sure there are 100's of ways to get around the ban, ssl proxy, socks, tor, vpn even 3rd party mirrors even downloading the entire site as a torrent (ironically) etc. So its clear its never going to work and yet we still have some of the most powerful people in the world, such as the UK's Prime Minster David Cameron trying to filter the internet.

He said, "With our new system, every parent will be prompted to protect their child online. If they don't make choices, protection will be automatically on. No other government has taken such radical steps before. And once all this is in place, Britain will have the most robust internet child protection measures of any country in the world - bar none."
In my opinion this is not only drip fed censorship with just one step removed from applying the porn filter to what ever else he wants, or indeed monitoring everything we're doing online, but also makes the state a nanny. Removing parenting responsibility from them, luring them into a false sense of security about how their child is protected online... but that's a whole different story, but its where we're headed with the censorship and monitoring.

sagum said,
[...]

QFFT.

Each and every word you said I agree with 100%.

It's a joy to see that there're people who think just like me in anything they said on a topic and there's not a single thing that I disagree with.

People need to get a better grip on the actual happening, because censorship has always been justified and "commonly understood", fast forward a few decades or hundreds of years and we're all like "OMG! How could they let that happen?!!".

Well, in this day and age the justification is not the protection of the reputation of a monarchy or something like that, but children *yawn*
Or piracy *yawn again*

Mind you, that's all just hogwash and nothing really helps the issues, but only makes censorship "accepted".
Fast forward a bit and we MIGHT have a little more acceptance for censorship in general and we're back in the reputation safety game...
Just take a good long look at China, they will surely assist us with getting the need across to the people.

GS:mac

They earn money from their clients to search for infringing content and do the removals. Hence, the corporations pay these copyright groups to look for infringing content.

Thanks RIAA, makes it easier searching for content I want. I just have to click on the report at the bottom of the search page 'read the DMCA complaint'

Commenting is disabled on this article.