Sharman Networks sue K++ developers, force Google to remove K++ links from results

Sirotnikov · September 3, 2003, 22:59

This issue is very serious.

K++ is what until recently has been known as Kazaa Lite. K++ (aka KPP) has until recently been an extention to Kazaa Lite, and was recently integrated into a single product.

Kazaa Lite is a program built on top of regular Kazaa, which strips the Kazaa sponsor ads, and the spyware it installs (such as Gator etc). It also installs several hacks and improvements to improve the interface, networking and so on.

Sharman Networks, the owners of Kazaa, have sued the developers of Kazaa Lite and K++.

What is more frightening, that they sent notice to Google demanding that it removed any sites relating to Kazaa Lite, from it's search results.

This issue is very serious, since as of now, our search results are not free, but rather subject to legal problems. In general this shows how the Digital Millenium Act is capable of limiting access to information, which was previously thought to be free.

Google is thought by many as their "starting point" to the web. They trust the search engine to provide trust worthy information for them to start browsing .

If google can be censored, so can any other site, ranging from yahoo to the new york times.

What is amusing, is that though Google has complied, they have posted a notice explaining that certain search results have been removed in compliance with the DMCA, and posted a link to the complaint letter by Sharman Networks which... you guessed it - shows an ordered list of the results that should be blocked.

Way to go Google

mrmitchell · September 3, 2003, 23:02

DMCA actions like this are akin to the government preventing an encyclopedia from saying what Communism is.

Then again, Google's response is like the encyclopedia inserting a special page with an image of the bird.

EDIT: IMO, Google should take one of these to court--it's HIGHLY unlikely that a court would not overturn at least part of the DMCA because of its "chilling effects" such as this.

Nubclear · September 3, 2003, 23:06

Umm....A search for K++ and Kazaa Lite returned as normal.

Asher · September 3, 2003, 23:08

Look closer, Tass.

mrmitchell · September 3, 2003, 23:09

Yeah, Tass, klite.tk or whatever it is has disappeared from the results listing.

mrmitchell · September 3, 2003, 23:15

[quote] "Hacked versions present a significant threat to the stability and security of users' computers by taking the certified Kazaa software and making unstable and potentially damaging modifications," [quote]
(...Sharman wrote. From an article I found on Google News

)

Bullshit. Spyware and adware found in KaZaA certainly cause more problems than K-lite.

Skanky Burns · September 3, 2003, 23:22

Its taking profit from the Sharman group more like.

mrmitchell · September 3, 2003, 23:25

Delistings like this open the chance for it to be used to suppress real free speech, however.

Soul Survivor · September 3, 2003, 23:41

whats next the riaa demanding all search results containing "mp3" be removed??

Urban Ranger · September 3, 2003, 23:56

What does DMCA has anything to do with this?

The Mad Monk · September 3, 2003, 23:59

That would be a reasonable expectation.

Asher · September 4, 2003, 00:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
What does DMCA has anything to do with this?

Oh boy, I wonder!

Maybe it has to do with distributing altered copyrighted code without permission? Just out on a whim here buddy!

Urban Ranger · September 4, 2003, 00:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
Oh boy, I wonder!

Maybe it has to do with distributing altered copyrighted code without permission? Just out on a whim here buddy!

If you are so kind, please point out where in the DMCA that allows for this.

Asher · September 4, 2003, 00:20

It doesn't, hence why it's illegal?

st_swithin · September 4, 2003, 00:21

It doesn't.

Skanky Burns · September 4, 2003, 01:58

I like the irony that you can download K++ using the Kazaa network, and there isn't a great deal the people who built the network can do about it.

laurentius · September 4, 2003, 02:04

Try/use Emule instead. I tried kazaa myself but throw it away after about 2 hours because its lameness

Skanky Burns · September 4, 2003, 02:32

eMule is only really good for large files. For mp3's and even small movies, K is much better. By the time you actually get to the beginning of someone's queue in eMule, your download would be complete with K.

MichaeltheGreat · September 4, 2003, 02:35

Quote:

Originally posted by mrmitchell
DMCA actions like this are akin to the government preventing an encyclopedia from saying what Communism is.

Then again, Google's response is like the encyclopedia inserting a special page with an image of the bird.

EDIT: IMO, Google should take one of these to court--it's HIGHLY unlikely that a court would not overturn at least part of the DMCA because of its "chilling effects" such as this.

Why should Google spend the money if the party directly affected doesn't want to bother? Google ain't losing anything here.

Dis · September 4, 2003, 02:38

does Kazaa lite still work though?

That's all I care about

MichaeltheGreat · September 4, 2003, 02:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
What does DMCA has anything to do with this?

Everything. The fact that Google is a search engine rather than a host is irrelevant. Knowlingly aiding in the distribution of infringing material is illegal, and once Google is put on notice, they obviously know.

laurentius · September 4, 2003, 02:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
eMule is only really good for large files. For mp3's and even small movies, K is much better. By the time you actually get to the beginning of someone's queue in eMule, your download would be complete with K.

Depends whether you have high or low ID....
I get my mp3 fast..

Skanky Burns · September 4, 2003, 03:59

High id only. Still slower.

optimus2861 · September 6, 2003, 18:57

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Everything. The fact that Google is a search engine rather than a host is irrelevant. Knowlingly aiding in the distribution of infringing material is illegal, and once Google is put on notice, they obviously know.

It's not that Google is aiding in distribution -- the programs in question aren't even on Google's own servers -- it's that they can be held vicariously liable for infringement after the time that they are notified of the search results, under the DMCA's "safe harbour" provision. Google's been hit with a lot of requests to take down offending material to various copyright holders -- same cases downright ridiculous ones (i.e. the Church of Scientology had Google remove access to sites critical of them, claiming the use of their name without their permission on the part of the criticizers was copyright infringement) -- but under the DMCA they either have to respond & take down the links immediately or they can be sued and potentially lose their status as a "safe harbour"

.

See http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/notice.cgi for many examples of what Google has to put up with.

JohnT · September 6, 2003, 19:10

"In general this shows how the Digital Millenium Act is capable of limiting access to information, which was previously thought to be free."

Well, only by the young and broke. As somebody who has purchased newspapers, gone into bookstores, etc. I can most emphatically assure you that Information is not free and has never been.

yaroslav · September 6, 2003, 19:19

Thank you SIro, for that history. It is amusing... and troubling, at the same time!

Urban Ranger · September 7, 2003, 07:31

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Knowlingly aiding in the distribution of infringing material is illegal, and once Google is put on notice, they obviously know.

Sure, but unless Sharman Networks can prove that K++ infringes upon their copyright, Google should not be effected.

Asher · September 7, 2003, 15:55

Proving K++ infringes upon their copyright is easier then trivial...

mrmitchell · September 7, 2003, 16:01

Quote:

Why should Google spend the money if the party directly affected doesn't want to bother? Google ain't losing anything here.

They're losing respect, but they gain it all back with the "We have removed results" notice

Quote:

Sure, but unless Sharman Networks can prove that K++ infringes upon their copyright, Google should not be effected.

Reverse engineering software and distributing the new copy...it creates a loss for the original creator, because no advertising revenue is derived from it. (Unfortunately), that's what the law says.

Urban Ranger · September 8, 2003, 01:56

Quote:

Originally posted by mrmitchell
Reverse engineering software and distributing the new copy...it creates a loss for the original creator, because no advertising revenue is derived from it. (Unfortunately), that's what the law says.

A "clean room" approach to reverse engineering is allowed by copyright laws AFAIK.