Google Takedown requests increase by 1137% compared to 2011

Since Google is the biggest search provider in the world, the site must wade through many different results, including those which may be illegal or otherwise law-breaking.

Google actually does allow its users to request the removal of what they feel is unsuitable for the site by using an online tool. Governments and users can both request URL takedowns, where the site will remove URLs from its search results if what the site is doing warrants such a response.

Sites are often flagged for takedown by the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), and Google complies with requests made through this act. Most sites comply since it protects their reputation, but there are others which refuse to comply with the act. One obvious example is The Pirate Bay, which refuses to remove anything.

Using Google a few years ago, you could have found torrents for anything and everything. Pirate Bay links were among the top search results, and then there were plenty of other sites offering more trackers and such for your illegitimate needs. Anyone could hop into the pirate ship by using Google's results.

An increase over 1000% is definitely something to write about, but the image below sums it up much more succinctly.

Google is receiving over a million requests for result removals a week. The past month has looked like this, in terms of those contacting the company:

  • 1,825 copyright owners
  • 1,406 anti-piracy reporting organizations
  • 5,733,402 URLs
  • 32,545 domains

That's downright insane for a single month, and it could well continue to increase. Google's Transparency Report was published earlier this year, but since its publication, figures have rocketed. Perhaps the groups doing the reporting have gotten wise to the results, so waited until they couldn't be impacted by their requests?

Some of the takedown requests are hilarious, such as the woman requesting a picture removed because it showed her height and weight, despite being unrelated to her otherwise. This is one example of when Google did not take something down upon request.

The increasing demand for DMCA-style takedowns could be explained by the company's new piracy penalty, but it might also indicate a changing trend among governments using the internet. Some countries take a dim view of certain topics. Way back in 2007, Neowin reported on Thailand's attempt to sue YouTube over an insult targeted at the royal family, so strange happenings are aplenty.

Source: TorrentFreak

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Weekend Poll: How do you like Microsoft's new logo?

Next Story

Editorial: Moving from QWERTY to QWERTZ on short notice

11 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Using Google a few years ago, you could have found torrents for anything and everything. Pirate Bay links were among the top search results, and then there were plenty of other sites offering more trackers and such for your illegitimate needs. Anyone could hop into the pirate ship by using Google's results..


Let me make something clear,
forget all that please.

as of today there are many crap that you google, you then go the top links and its all load of crap, but the funny thing is the load of crap is what people want to read.
google "deaths from Marijuana", go to the first link.
it shows "stats" of "deaths from Marijuana". it says "0".
then it shows the stats of ritalin,webrilin,etc. it says 8,000
but don't forget to read this in red:
"[Editor's Note - ProCon.org makes no claim that the data below reflects occurrence rates. The information is presented for our readers' benefit who may feel that the relative comparisons have value. ProCon.org attempted to find the total number of users of each of these drugs by contacting the FDA, pharmaceutical trade organizations, and the actual drug manufacturers. We either did not receive a response or were told the information was proprietary or otherwise unavailable]"

then those fake stats would end up on wikipedia of course.
its what some people want to see and brag about.

much of the crap is lies but really some knowledge is just ignorance.
just keep in mind, the google results are "fielded" with, the thing is its not really "fielded" with but the top results of some stuff are bull crap.

EdenHerman said,
Using Google a few years ago, you could have found torrents for anything and everything. Pirate Bay links were among the top search results, and then there were plenty of other sites offering more trackers and such for your illegitimate needs. Anyone could hop into the pirate ship by using Google's results..


Let me make something clear,
forget all that please.

as of today there are many crap that you google, you then go the top links and its all load of crap, but the funny thing is the load of crap is what people want to read.
google "deaths from Marijuana", go to the first link.
it shows "stats" of "deaths from Marijuana". it says "0".
then it shows the stats of ritalin,webrilin,etc. it says 8,000
but don't forget to read this in red:
"[Editor's Note - ProCon.org makes no claim that the data below reflects occurrence rates. The information is presented for our readers' benefit who may feel that the relative comparisons have value. ProCon.org attempted to find the total number of users of each of these drugs by contacting the FDA, pharmaceutical trade organizations, and the actual drug manufacturers. We either did not receive a response or were told the information was proprietary or otherwise unavailable]"

then those fake stats would end up on wikipedia of course.
its what some people want to see and brag about.

much of the crap is lies but really some knowledge is just ignorance.
just keep in mind, the google results are "fielded" with, the thing is its not really "fielded" with but the top results of some stuff are bull crap.

Actually the death rate for MJ is '0'. The death rate for prescription meds is way up there. No, those 'fake' stats wouldn't end up on Wikipedia. The site gets a lot of flak from small people who have bogus claims about inaccuracies. Not saying they don't exist however, when found, they are fixed. Also, the sources are cited and verified. You as the reader have the responsibility to research and form your own opinion as to whether or not to believe certain stats. One can do the same with books and magazines. There are plenty of those with bogus stats - anything to say about them?

KCRic said,
Actually the death rate for MJ is '0'. The death rate for prescription meds is way up there. No, those 'fake' stats wouldn't end up on Wikipedia. The site gets a lot of flak from small people who have bogus claims about inaccuracies. Not saying they don't exist however, when found, they are fixed. Also, the sources are cited and verified. You as the reader have the responsibility to research and form your own opinion as to whether or not to believe certain stats. One can do the same with books and magazines. There are plenty of those with bogus stats - anything to say about them?

Marijuana is a prescription medication.
go back to school

hey guys, that's life.
let us just stop been so outranged.

the links that been requested are illegal in some what.

stuff happens, you don't own google so whatever.
google is already awesome.. some copyrighted urls removed is no big deal ( no big deal but like idk...)

guys, stuff happens so please get over it.
don't worry, its all going to work out in the end...

Wow. Remember when Google used to be sweet. YouTube with no ads, Google with less privacy issues, and non-censored search results! We need a new SE, for the people by the people. Not another corporate bulldog.

Wow. Remember when Google used to be sweet. YouTube with no ads, Google with less privacy issues, and non-censored search results! We need a new SE, for the people by the people. Not another corporate bulldog.

One million requests per week?!? That's insane - 1.6 reports per second? How on earth do they keep track of that lot?

Shut up slaves. You'll watch what what they tell you to watch. Sorry, got ahead of myself, that's not planned for another couple of years. Isn't the water nice and warm!

Just out of interest, do people consider it acceptable to censor the internet for economic reasons? And if so does that differ to people's opinions on political censorship?