I just got a reply from Google (they claim it was difficult to find my contact info. Right...) where they inform me that Operation Clambake is removed from Google because of a DMCA notification from the cult. The complaint mentions a ridiculous list of addresses which successfully removes the whole site from their engine. To get OC back we have to counter the complaint. Since the complaint is making claims of ownership of pages clearly not owned by the cult, this could hurt the cult only.

But this means OC will have to follow this up with a US lawyer, which might be difficult and expensive.

Here's what I received from Google today:

[START QUOTE FROM GOOGLE REPLY] We removed certain specific URLs in response to a notification submitted by the Religious Technology Center and Bridge Publications under section 512(c)(3) of the the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). Had we not removed these URLs, we would be subject to a claim for copyright infringement, regardless of its merits. The URLs included in that notification are attached to this email.

Pursuant to sections 512(g)(2) and (3) of the DMCA, you have the ability to submit a counter notification, in which event we can reinstate the material. As stated in section 512(g) (3), the contents of this notification must include the following:

(A) A physical or electronic signature of the subscriber.

(B) Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled.

(C) A statement under penalty of perjury that the subscriber has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.

(D) The subscriber's name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that the subscriber consents to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which the address is located, or if the subscriber's address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which the service provider may be found, and that the subscriber will accept service of process from the person who provided notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) or an agent of such person.

Here are the urls mentioned in the complaint that I believe are related to your site:

www.xenu.net/ www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/ www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/ www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/index.html www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop1.html www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop2.html www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop3.html www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop4.html www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop5.html www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop6.htm www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/ clan-images.html www.xenu.net/archive/photoalbum/lisas_case_sup.html www.xenu.net/archive/events/ www.xenu.net/archive/events/lisa_mcpherson/ www.xenu.net/archive/disk/ www.xenu.net/archive/disk/enemy/ www.xenu.net/archive/disk/enemy/da.htm www.xenu.net/archive/disk/enemy/targets.htm www.xenu.net/archive/disk/archive/grd_chrt.htm www.xenu.net/archive/disk/OTIII/ www.xenu.net/archive/hubbandcw/ www.xenu.net/archive/greece/ www.xenu.net/archive/HCOB/FU-HCOB-630511.html www.xenu.net/archive/HCOB/FU-HCOB-630714.html www.xenu.net/archive/HCOB/FU-HCOB-610619.html www.xenu.net/archive/enemy_names/ www.xenu.net/archive/enemy_names/dead_agenting.html www.xenu.net/archive/enemy_names/targets.html www.xenu.net/archive/tonelevel.html www.xenu.net/archive/grade_chart.html www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/ www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenuleaf.htm www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenusw.htm www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenunl.htm www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenufr.htm www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenufi.htm www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenuno.htm www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenuge.htm www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenuaf.htm www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenuru-k.htm www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenuheb.htm www.xenu.net/archive/so/ www.clambake.org/ www.clambake.org/ archive/photoalbum/ www.clambake.org/archive/photoalbum/propaganda www.clambake.org/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/index.html www.clambake.org/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop1.html www.clambake.org/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop2.html www.clambake.org/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop3.html www.clambake.org/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop4.html www.clambake.org/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop5.html www.clambake.org/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop6.html www.clambake.org/archive/photoalbum/ clan-images.html www.clambake.org/archive/photoalbum/lisas_case_sup.html www.clambake.org/archive/events/ www.clambake.org/archive/events/lisa_mcpherson/ www.clambake.org/archive/disk/ www.clambake.org/archive/disk/enemy/ www.clambake.org/archive/disk/enemy/da.htm www.clambake.org/archive/disk/enemy/targets.htm www.clambake.org/archive/disk/archive/grd_chrt.htm www.clambake.org/archive/disk/OTIII/ www.clambake.org/archive/hubbandcw/ www.clambake.org/archive/greece/ www.clambake.org/archive/HCOB/FU-HCOB-630511.html www.clambake.org/archive/HCOB/FU-HCOB-630714.html www.clambake.org/archive/HCOB/FU-HCOB-610619.html www.clambake.org/archive/enemy_names/ www.clambake.org/archive/enemy_names/dead_agenting.html www.clambake.org/archive/enemy_names/targets.html www.clambake.org/archive/tonelevel.html www.clambake.org/archive/grade_chart.html www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/ www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/xenuleaf.htm www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/xenusw.htm www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/xenunl.htm www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/xenufr.htm www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/xenufi.htm www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/xenuno.htm www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/xenuge.htm www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/xenuaf.htm www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/xenuru-k.htm www.clambake.org/archive/leaflet/xenuheb.htm www.clambake.org/archive/so/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/propaganda home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/index.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop1.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop2.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop3.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop4.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop5.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/propaganda/prop6.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/ clan-images.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/photoalbum/lisas_case_sup.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/events/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/events/lisa_mcpherson/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/disk/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/disk/enemy/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/disk/enemy/da.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/disk/enemy/targets.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/disk/archive/grd_chrt.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/disk/OTIII/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/hubbandcw/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/greece/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/HCOB/FU-HCOB-630511.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/HCOB/FU-HCOB-630714.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/HCOB/FU-HCOB-610619.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/enemy_names/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/enemy_names/dead_agenting.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/enemy_names/targets.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/tonelevel.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/grade_chart.html home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/ home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/xenuleaf.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/xenusw.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/xenunl.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/xenufr.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/xenufi.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/xenuno.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/xenuge.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/xenuaf.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/xenuru-k.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/leaflet/xenuheb.htm home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/so/ [END GOOGLE REPLY]

Best wishes, Andreas Heldal-Lund # home.online.no/~heldal # www.xenu.net --------------------------------------------------------------- If anyone can show me, and prove to me, that I am wrong in thought or deed, I will gladly change. I seek the truth, which never yet hurt anybody. It is only persistence in self-delusion and ignorance which does harm.

------------------------------------------[Marcus Aurelius]----

Google pulls anti-Scientology links By Matt Loney and Evan Hansen Staff Writers, CNET News.com March 21, 2002, 11:35 AM PT http://news.com.com/2100-1023-865936.html

Google was accused Wednesday of effectively removing from the Internet a Web site that is critical of the Church of Scientology after it deleted links to some of the site's pages from its search engine.

The popular search company said it removed the links after it received a copyright-infringement complaint from the Church of Scientology. Andreas Heldal-Lund, Webmaster of the site Xenu.net, said in a Usenet posting that the complaint demanded that Google take down a large number of references to different parts of Xenu.net.

"The complaint mentions a ridiculous list of addresses, which successfully removes the whole site from their engine," he said.

Search engines routinely remove links to URLs, or Web addresses, upon request to avoid litigation. Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), sites cannot be held liable for copyright infringement provided they promptly take down content flagged by a copyright holder. Much of that activity has targeted links to MP3 files that turn up on search engines.

Digital rights advocates said the Church of Scientology's takedown request is noteworthy because it underscores potential conflicts between the DMCA and free speech.

"The danger is that people will attempt to silence critics under the guise of copyright infringement," said Fred von Lohmann, an attorney with San Francisco's Electronic Frontier Foundation.

In the Xenu.net case, the removed links led to pages that contain material copyrighted by the Church of Scientology. On his site, Heldal-Lund defends this use of copyrighted material, saying that he believes Scientology survives "through the protection afforded it by copyright laws in a way that copyright laws were not designed to address."

The right to link has been the subject of several high-profile lawsuits, including a dispute between hacker publication 2600.com and the motion picture industry over code known as DeCSS that can theoretically be used to crack DVDs. In that case, a federal judge in New York held that links to the DeCSS code violated the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA, which bars trafficking in software that can be used to defeat copy protection. That decision was upheld on appeal.

Another linking case under way in New York involves MP3 search service MP3Board.com, which is challenging the DMCA's notice and takedown provision. The case, filed in May 2000, is pending. MP3Board had created a delisting feature allowing copyright holders to pull offending links automatically, but the move did not mollify copyright holders, who were upset that the search engine included results from peer-to-peer exchanges such as Gnutella.

The EFF's von Lohmann said search engines are not required to comply with takedown notices, but that most do to avoid the risks of litigation.

"Search engines can't take on every copyright holder," he said. "It's hard to say search engines should pay for this fight themselves."

Google noted that Xenu.net has some recourse. "Google provides Webmasters the ability to have their content reinstated if they submit a counter notification to Google," the company said in a statement.

Xenu.net's Heldal-Lund said this would require the services of a lawyer and would be prohibitively expensive.

Matt Loney reported from London; Evan Hansen reported from San Francisco.

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Re: Wired on Google's takedown of xenu.net
Date: 22 Mar 2002 00:52:52 GMT
Message-ID: <a7dv94$ieo@netaxs.com>

Google Yanks Anti-Church Sites Wired News By Declan McCullagh March 21, 2002 PST http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,51233,00.html

WASHINGTON -- The Church of Scientology has managed to yank references to anti-Scientology websites from the Google search engine.

Citing the controversial Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Scientology lawyers are claiming that Google may no longer include anti-Scientology sites that allegedly infringe upon the church's intellectual property.

A letter from Google to the Xenu.net Scientology-protest site says: "We removed certain specific URLs in response to a notification.... Had we not removed these URLs, we would be subject to a claim for copyright infringement, regardless of its merits."

So far, the DMCA has come under fire because it bans most attempts to bypass or disable copy-protection technology. But Scientology is relying on another section of the 1998 law , which says a "service provider shall not be liable" for copyright infringements -- if it moves with dispatch to delete any "reference or link to material or activity claimed to be infringing."

Until this week, anyone typing in "Scientology" on the wildly popular search engine found references to the Xenu.net site in the first page of results.

Now Xenu.net and clambake.org have virtually disappeared from Google's database.

When using the DMCA as a legal club to thwap critics, Scientology must claim that its copyrighted material has been unlawfully expropriated.

Among the ostensibly infringing sites: Excerpts from an internal report on a Scientology member who died under mysterious circumstances after allegedly being held against her will, and photographs of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard and others juxtaposed with Adolf Hitler.

This isn't the first time Scientology has used copyright threats to stifle criticism.

As far back as August 1995, Scientology sued one of its former members for posting anti-church information to the Internet and persuaded a federal judge to permit the seizure of his computer. The church then sued The Washington Post for reporting on the computer seizure and quoting from public court records.

Last November, Scientology used the DMCA to pressure a U.S. Internet provider to remove the church's secret scriptures from the scientology-kills.org site. DMCA threats from the church seem to be becoming so common that Dave Touretzsky, a scientist at Carnegie Mellon, has even drafted a form letter that can be sent in reply.

Since Xenu.net and its companion sites are in Norway, Scientology can't use U.S. law to remove the pages directly. But in getting Google to delete them from its mammoth database, the church hopes to remove one of the most obvious ways that Internet users can stumble across the sites.

Xenu.net does have the option to reply to Google and try to make its way back into the database by refuting Scientology's claims. The DMCA offers that way out -- but Xenu.net's publisher would have to agree to the jurisdiction of a U.S. court.

One Internet executive in the Netherlands reported this week that Scientology "harassed" him and his upstream providers for years because he hosted an anti-Scientology site.

Hubbard's secret scriptures teach that 75 million years ago, an evil galactic overlord named Xenu solved the galaxy's overpopulation problem by freezing excess people and transporting the bodies to Teegeeack, now called Earth. After the hapless travelers were defrosted, they were chained to volcanoes that were blown up by hydrogen bombs -- and their disembodied spirits continue to haunt mankind today.

Message-ID: <3C9A7EAA.B12559CF@yahoo.com>
From: El Queso <the_cheese_23@yahoo.com>
Subject: Dear OSA - you failed again
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 00:42:13 GMT

Well - congratulations. You've done it again.

Your attempt to suppress free speech has backfired on you yet again.

You have drawn more attention to your fascism than your critics ever could. Your operation against Xenu.net is a total failure, and in fact, only succeeded in raising awareness of your evil tactics and attitudes.

Slashdot, wired, and many others have published all the details (Wired even told the Xenu story) - and the discussion has only begun. Thousands of new critics were created by you in the last 48 hours. Thank you - you do a better job of spreading the real truth about Scientology than just about anyone.

I wonder if you'll ever learn from your mistakes? Your first Slashdot footbullet could've been totally avoided if you'd have just let an old story lie. But you couldn't, could you, and it cost you big. This is looking like an even worse scenario, as many more media outlets are involved.

Guess what? As soon as you move on me - I'm gonna catch you and this will happen yet again. I know you won't heed my warning - you'll just keep following orders, but CLEARLY, this will not keep Scientology working.

Queso

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Email from Google
Date: 22 Mar 2002 00:55:18 GMT
Message-ID: <a7dvdm$ieo@netaxs.com>

Here's what I got back from Google in reply to a very convincing email I sent them.

-----

Thank you for your note about the Xenu.net website.

Google takes the first amendment very seriously. We are also obligated to follow the laws of the land. We removed some pages of the Xenu.net website from our search engine earlier this week in response to a copyright infringement notification under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). It is not within our discretion as a company to decide when to conform to the DMCA and when to ignore it. As the DMCA mandates, Google also provides webmasters with the ability to have their content reinstated if they submit a counter notification to Google. Until that action is taken, we will comply with the DMCA and keep the contested pages out of our index. If you'd like more information on this topic, you can find it here:

www.google.com/dmca.html or by searching Google for "DMCA"

(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&q=dmca).

We appreciate your interest in this issue and your taking the time to express your opinion.

Sincerely, The Google Team

-- Rod Keller/ Irresponsible Publisher/ Black Hat #1/ OSA Patsy/ Killer Rod Expert of the Toilet/ CWPD Mouthpiece/ Shelly Thompson in Drag The Lerma Apologist/ Merchant of Chaos/ Socio-Political Censor Bigot of Mystery/ Quasi-Scieno/ Mental Bully/ Vision of Destruction

From: "roger gonnet" <roger.gonnet@worldnet.fr>
Subject: Google answer to me and my answer to theirs
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 08:34:11 +0100
Message-ID: <a7ems8$2279$1@news5.isdnet.net>

----- Original Message ----- From: "The Google Team" <help@google.com>
To: "roger gonnet" <roger.gonnet@worldnet.fr>

Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 12:14 AM Subject: Re: did the most criminal cult bought the best search engine
google? [#199965]

> Thank you for your note about the Xenu.net website.
>
> Google takes the first amendment very seriously. We are also obligated to
> follow the laws of the land. We removed some pages of the Xenu.net
> website from our search engine earlier this week in response to a
> copyright infringement notification under the Digital Millenium Copyright
> Act (DMCA). It is not within our discretion as a company to decide when
> to conform to the DMCA and when to ignore it. As the DMCA mandates, Google
> also provides webmasters with the ability to have their content reinstated
> if they submit a counter notification to Google. Until that action is
> taken, we will comply with the DMCA and keep the contested pages out of
> our index. If you'd like more information on this topic, you can find it
> here:
> www.google.com/dmca.html or by searching Google for "DMCA"
>
> (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&q=dmca).
>
> We appreciate your interest in this issue and your taking the time to
> express your opinion.
>
> Sincerely,
> The Google Team
>

==== [to what I replied minutes ago]

Dear Sirs,

Thanks for your reply below.

You should know better, since that's your job, that the criminal cult to which you agreed to obey, is well known for its insane claims of DMCA. He even claimed one against me, for a work which is my property.

You should know that scientology has even tried to cancel any NG containing the world scientology, under this insane DMCA pretext. But the word scientology is not even the invention of these criminals or their chief.

The other part of my claim to you is that it seems you surrendered much sooner than yesterday, by allowing this criminal group to have almost only its own websites in the 100 first ones when searching for scientology.

You did it, despite the fact that scientology is the only one internet user to have spammed and abused internet with hundred of its scientology domain names, so as to lure your engine and others. It was therefore easy to avoid that trap, using some three lines of program so as to avoid their spamming of interlinked domain names .

Besides, and this is the most evident argument against your choice of "advertising allover" the scientology system: this makes you the knowingly accomplices of a recognized scam. Indeed:

if you did not know, the founder of that scam is L. Ron Hubbard, who has been sentenced to 4 years unsuspended jail in France, 1978, for, fraud and extortion. He never appealed the ruling, and scientology has been since sentenced three more times here.

Therefore, your choice to have unbalanced the normal balance between pros and cons - also due to the fact that you got a lot of money from the scam - is clearly illicit, and must be reversed once for all.

You can't be protecting a scam under the pretext that that scam is paying you. Protecting the scam is indeed a much more serious crime than **possibly** violating a copyright of some photos, without any money won by that "violation".

Think about it twice. Your engine is really a great one, but you don't need these criminals paying you to be able to remain free of their criminal lies.

Sincerely yours,

roger gonnet

From: Andreas Heldal-Lund - www.xenu.net <heldal@online.no>
Subject: BANG!!!! Ouch, foot in pain, foot in pain!
Organization: Operation Clambake
Message-ID: <pvul9u010mpdbp054idqpmlumlhse1npjn@4ax.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 09:56:47 GMT

I don't have to tell you folks, but I am getting insane amounts of e-mails from people who are just learning about Scientology because of the Google foot bullet from the cult.

You would not believe it!!!!!!

Here's a few:

---------------------- To: ahl@xenu.net Subject: Congratulations

Hi,

Isnt it amazing how any publicity is good publicity.

Thanks to the Church of Scientology, or whatever it likes to be called, restraining Google from having more than your main page available in its search engine, your site has been featured on www.theregister.co.uk , which is one of the main technology news sites for the UK.

Before then I had never heard of your site, as I guess a lot of people hadnt either. I bet the lawyers didnt realise doing this would bring your site to public attention.

--------------------

To: <ahl@xenu.net>

Subject: Google

Hi there

Just read a news article about your site being removed from Google by pressure from the Scientologists, and I would like to thank them for doing this.

Why? Because if they hadn't had your site removed, there would have been no news article, and without the news article I wouldn't have found out about your great site.

Carry on the great work, and lets hope that many more people find your site.

Regards ------------------ To: <ahl@xenu.net>

Subject: Google

Hi there

Just read a news article about your site being removed from Google by pressure from the Scientologists, and I would like to thank them for doing this.

Why? Because if they hadn't had your site removed, there would have been no news article, and without the news article I wouldn't have found out about your great site.

Carry on the great work, and lets hope that many more people find your site.

Regards ---------------- Subject: SIte
To: ahl@xenu.net

Dear Andreas Heldal-Lund

Good work on the site, sorry to hear about your page getting pulled from google. Seems like they attack any critic who goes against their view. Hopefully more people will uncloud their minds and see what is really happening. A long battle awaits, glad you are on our side.

Sincerely ---------------- To: ahl@xenu.net Subject: Operating thetan

ith that tho.

Always new they were out of it as some of my friends were duped back in the mid 70's to 80's. your site is amazing as I never realized how much $$ was involved, anyway I have always thought that he even chose the "thetan" as a joke; e.g.

without lisp it is "satan."

---------------- Subject: You have my vote for courage under fire
To: ahl@xenu.net

Dear Andreas,

I thank you for your bravery facing the "Church" of Scientology and I applaud your fight to expose this fanatical and depraved organization. I only wish I shared your courage enough to sign this letter of support.

---------------- To: <ahl@xenu.net>

Subject: message

Hi, I don't have anything to do with Scientology pro or con, but I do believe in free speech. I'm backing up your site to a set of directories and I'll make CD copies.

If you ever need it sent somewhere or several somewheres please email me.

---------------- To: heldal@online.no Subject: I enjoyed your site

Hi!

I just spent several hours reading stuff that you linked to at your personal web site. I really appreciate it. As you can see from the sig below, I found some inspiration.

Again, thanks, and ha det bra!

XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX -- Hobbes: How come we play war and not peace?

Calvin: Too few role models.

/The Essential Calvin and Hobbes, p72/ --------------- To: ahl@xenu.net Subject: Operation Clambake: A New Vision

I enjoyed your clambake. ...and your illustrated guide--great stuff that.

I particularly like the comment about "A VERY RICH FOR PROFIT MULTINATIONAL THAT USES "RELIGION" AS A SHIELD TO PROTECT ITSELF AGAINST INVESTIGATIONS AND TAXES."

----------------- To: <ahl@xenu.net>

Subject: Great Job!

Wonderful work. As a Ph.D. clinical psychologist, I have seen the horrific damage done to vulnerable people by this fascist cult.

----------------- Subject: Thanks for Clambake...
To: heldal@online.no

Hello - Just wanted to tell you how terrific your site is. I discovered it a year or so ago and am amazed at the wealth of material you've collected about Scientology. But I have a question ... with all I read about their tactics I wonder if you are in any danger? It seems like CoS would love nothing more than to stop you. The more I learn about them, the more frightening they seem.

I will tell everyone I meet who has any thought of becoming involved with Scientology to visit your website FIRST!

------------------ To: ahl@xenu.net Subject: Your great web site(s)

Hi Andreas -

I just read an account of how Google has been coerced into cutting out links to your Clambake site. This is a terrible shame - the Scientologist organization really are evil - I've gotten that impression more and more over the past couple of decades. I hope Google can be persuaded to put the links back up.

----------------- To: <ahl@xenu.net>

Subject: xenu.net

Found your site after reading cnet story about Google links.

This story is a better advertisement for this site than Google :) ----------------- Subject: I just found your web page via Drudge report.
To: ahl@xenu.net

Thank you for spreading the truth about the COS.

----------------- Subject: Complaint
To: press@google.com Cc: ahl@xenu.net

Stand up to the Scientoligists, its freedom of speech.

We have a right to dispute their wrong headed beliefs. The truth will win out if we allow argument and dissent.

----------------- To: <ahl@xenu.net>

Subject: Your doing the right thing

I found out about your site because it was in the news that Google cut you off. I ve booked marked your site since I believe that the pseudo psychology and eclectic religion of Scientology is nothing but a money making machine. It does this by consuming the resources of those who just don t know and the have their millions dumped into their own security apparatus to silence their detractors. Not to speak of their attack dog lawyers and super public relations teams. I wonder if all those big Hollywood stars get discounts for their clearings to polish the churches image. Keep it up ------------------ To: <ahl@xenu.net>

Subject: Keep up the great work

Hey Andreas

Read about your site and what you are trying to do. Good on you.

Warm greetings from SIngapore ------------------ To: <ahl@xenu.net>

Subject: Bravo!

I have never been involved in Scientology, but I have seen it suck the life out of a couple of my friends. I just have to say Bravo to you and your efforts! And, while the news of Google cutting links to your site is unwelcome, the fact that it has hit the newswires will publicize your cause. Keep going!

All the best, ------------------

AND IT JUST GOES ON AND ON!

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Reuters: xenu.net
Date: 22 Mar 2002 12:02:33 GMT
Message-ID: <a7f6gp$m3j@netaxs.com>

Google pulls, replaces Web page critical of Scientology San Jose Mercury News Thu, Mar. 21, 2002 http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/business/technology/2910195.htm

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Google Inc. restored a Web site critical of the Church of Scientology on its Internet search engine Thursday while free speech advocates slammed the the company for removing the site in the first place.

Google said the company had only removed certain pages from the site because of a copyright dispute.

"Certain pages of the Xenu.net website were removed from our search engine earlier this week in response to a copyright infringement notification under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)," Google spokesman David Krane said in an e-mail.

The home page for Xenu.net was "inadvertently removed" along with a long, two-page list of associated Web pages Wednesday but was put back Thursday, said Google spokeswoman Cindy McCaffrey. Neither she nor Krane were available for further comment.

On Thursday evening, the Web site was listed fourth under Google search results for "Scientology" and 8th under "Church of Scientology."

A lawyer representing the Church of Scientology accused Xenu.net of "wholesale, verbatim copyright infringement" by allegedly reprinting large amounts of material on the site.

"We don't abuse this act," the lawyer, Helena Kobrin of the Los Angeles firm of Moxin & Kobrin said of the DMCA. "We go very strictly by what the copyright laws are."

Copyright law allows people to use pieces of copyrighted material for personal, education and other purposes under a so-called "fair use"

provision. However, Kobrin said the Web site used more than was allowed under fair use.

"We will do whatever we can to protect these copyrights," she said. "The real story here is my clients are constantly the targets of some really horrendous stuff on the Internet."

The Church of Scientology, whose members include actors Tom Cruise and John Travolta, has mounted challenges to Web sites and organizations that are critical of it in the past.

STIFLING CRITICISM

Robin Gross, staff attorney for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the Church of Scientology was trying to use copyright law to stifle criticism.

"A lot of the cases using copyright to quell critics are Church of Scientology cases," she said.

The DMCA protects companies that host or link to Web sites from being held liable if they notify allegedly offending Web sites that there is a complaint about them and give them a chance to respond, Gross said.

Google did not have to remove Xenu.net immediately, as the company claimed it did in a letter to Andreas Heldal-Lund, the Norwegian Web master of the site, attorney Gross said.

"Had we not removed these URLs (uniform resource locators, or network address of Web pages), we would be subject to a claim for copyright infringement, regardless of its merit," Google said in its letter.

Don Marti, an activist who protested the arrest of a Russian programmer under the DMCA last year, said he and other activists met with Google on Thursday to discuss the situation.

"Google invited us right in," said Marti, whose ad hoc group is called "Mountain View, California, Xenu Independent Study Group."

Google had the Web site back up before the group arrived at its Mountain View offices on Thursday afternoon, he said.

"We're discussing Google's DMCA policy and trying to keep this from happening again," Marti said. "Google should be a fair and accurate representation of what's on the Internet."

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Some other newspapers
Date: 22 Mar 2002 12:25:55 GMT
Message-ID: <a7f7sj$m3j@netaxs.com>

Here's some other newspapers that carried a story on the Google/Xenu.net scandal. Most of them took the Reuters article, some translated into German.

Bocholter-Borkener Volksblatt Business 2.0 The Globe and Mail Heise Online Independant Media Center Lycos News The Namibian Newspaper NGZ Online Orange County Weekly The Register RP Online Siliconvalley Online The Times of India Wired News ZD Net News

-- Rod Keller/ Irresponsible Publisher/ Black Hat #1/ OSA Patsy/ Killer Rod Expert of the Toilet/ CWPD Mouthpiece/ Shelly Thompson in Drag The Lerma Apologist/ Merchant of Chaos/ Socio-Political Censor Bigot of Mystery/ Quasi-Scieno/ Mental Bully/ Vision of Destruction

From: fantomaster@_NEVER_SPAM_!_fantomaster.com
Subject: Google + Scientology: Media Overview
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 15:33:53 +0100
Message-ID: <lvfm9u8164jb98q0il88plaakrj3ogm5ci@4ax.com>
Organization: -= Skynet Usenet Service =-

Scientology's Search Engine Spam - Is Google Censoring Scieno Critics?

Here's a report on what seems to be Scientology's search engine optimization savvy, attempting to explain the mechanics of their keyword dominance on various sengines, notably Google:

"The Church of Scientology's Supremacy over the search term 'Scientology' on Google"

http://www.operatingthetan.com/google/

Has Google resorted to censoring critics of Scientology now? Certainly there are quite a few people who seem to think so, vide this piece:

"Google censors xenu.net?"

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/3/20/8222/92911

Politech is featuring an in-depth article giving details including a list of pages claimed to have been banned by Google titled "Google bows to Scientology's DMCA request, yanks critics' site" at:

http://www.politechbot.com/p-03281.html

You may also want to follow the ongoing Usenet discussion on alt.internet.search-engines here, namely the current threads titled - "Popular Scientology website disappears from Google"

- "Scientology censors xenu.net?"

and:

- "ANOTHER anti-Scientology website deleted from Google"

(There are lots of others up now.)

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=alt.internet.search-engines

Now the major media portals are hooked on the story, too:

"Cult forces Google to remove critical links"

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t412-s2107088,00.html "Google Yanks Anti-Church Sites"

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,51233,00.html And, expectably, Slashdot has begun to feature it as well:

http://slashdot.org/yro/02/03/21/0453200.shtml?tid=99

So is it all over now? While everybody's still waiting for Google to declare themselves officially, the controversial pages are up again.

Contrary to earlier claims, Google's Cindy McCaffrey told Reuters that Xenu.net's home page and the others were "inadvertently removed".

Nevertheless Google has come under heavy fire by free speech advocate groups for the way they have handled the affair to date. It seems that Google is heading for some rather hectic measures of damage containment now.

More on this:

"Google Restores Web Page Critical of Scientology"

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020322/wr_nm/tech_google_dc_2 "Google revives Scientology Web page"

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-866562.html?tag=cd_mh [2002-03-20]+[2002-03-21]+[2002-03-22]

Source: fantomNews http://fantomaster.com/fanews0.html

fantomaster

================================================================= *** THE ULTIMATE STEALTH - THE FULL CONTROL! *** http://fantomaster.com Industrial-strength Cloaking (IP delivery) and stealth technology fantomNews: free low volume newsletter available =================================================================

Message-ID: <3C9B4A77.E9DC343D@cox.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 07:15:03 -0800
From: barb <bwarr1@cox.net>
Subject: In Just One Day

Recently, the dorian entity posted a slightly inaccurate theory that most posters here are OSA, luring the unwary into the cult of Scientology by exposing that organization's true identity.

He's got the What right, but missed on the Who. After considerable research (hah) in the past few days, I have discovered the truth:

THE SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATION IS FULL OF COVERT CRITICS!

Yes, folks, it's quite simple, really. Scientology's legal team is working hard to help us expose the cult for what it truly is; a criminal, psycho-terrorist enterprise parading around behind a mask of religion.

Could we, the mere footsoldiers in the battle against this evil, have ever done a better job at pointing the uninformed and curious toward Operation Clambake?

I don't think so! In just one day, and a stat day to boot, thousands of people who had never heard of Scientology began hitting the critical sites, thanks to the DMCA request to Google. Every online 'zine on the planet carried a variation of this story, resulting in skyrocketing numbers of hits to Clambake, lermanet, and other critical sites mentioned in the articles.

In just one day, more people became informed about Scientology and its abuses.

In just one day, more critics were made.

In just one day, Scientology got publically buggered in the forum of public opinion.

We owe the Scientology legal team a great big THANK YOU, and awarded SP status.

Now, face the picture of Ava, folks and join me in a great big HIP, HIP, HOORAY!

HIP, HIP, HOORAY!

HIP, HIP, HOORAY!

-- Barb Chaplain, ARSCC http://members.cox.net/bwarr1/index.htm SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATE $CIENTOLOGY? Sign the petition at http://www4.PetitionOnline.com/cofs1/

"Every week, every month, every year, every decade and now every century, Scientology does weird and stupid things to damage its own reputation."

-Steve Zadarnowski

"Comparing Scientology to a motorcycle gang is a gross, unpardonable insult to bikers everywhere. Even at our worst, we are never as bad as Scientology."

-ex-member, Thunderclouds motorcycle "club"

"$cientology sees the world this way: One man with a picket sign:

terrorism. Five thousand people dead in a deliberate inferno: business opportunity.

$cientology oozes _under_ terrorists to hide."

-Chris Leithiser

From: "wog" <raw@meat.net>
Subject: Open Letter to Google in Reply to their letter
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 12:33:07 -0500
Message-ID: <a7fpsk$kn90b$1@ID-80408.news.dfncis.de>
charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear Sirs,

As I mentioned in one of my earlier posts to you, I recently started checking out alt.religion.scientology only within the last few weeks. I was astounded at the petty legal moves that the "Church" uses to constantly harass its opponents, particularly those who are cash-poor.

You, however, have little excuse. I applaud your PR Department for stating that they "inadvertently" removed the home page of xenu.net, but we both know that since the lawyers for scientology had the home page listed first, it was not inadvertently removed.

You guys panicked, pure and simple.

Since the DMCA is such a serious issue I would think that you all would have enough common sense to review the pages that you pulled and find out for yourselves whether there was a DMCA issue or not.

Did it ever occur to you all that the reason these scientology noodnicks chose xenu.net is because it is an overseas site and that it would be inconvenient at the very least for the xenu.net people to fight this in the U.S.A.?

Did it ever occur to you all to check the site for accuracy of the complaint?

Apparently not. You panicked. And because you panicked, you now have a serious credibility problem.

The DMCA allows you all a lot of wiggle room, as your lawyers are well aware, and because of this, I am seriously disappointed with Google's reaction, as are many, many others.

You have shown a singular lack of courage for a company that was at the forefront of the Linux revolution.

I wish I had a suggestion as how you can repair it, other than checking your sources and re-checking the pages in the complaint, and restoring those that have no or few direct references to scientology material. Most of those pages that you de-listed fit this category.

And, of course, follow the advice of Jack Welsh and others and admit you were wrong publicly and move on. The DMCA is an important issue that you, of all people, should stand up against at every opportunity.

Regards,

help@google.com wrote:

Thank you for your note about the Xenu.net website.

Google takes the first amendment very seriously. We are also obligated to follow the laws of the land. We removed some pages of the Xenu.net website from our search engine earlier this week in response to a copyright infringement notification under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). It is not within our discretion as a company to decide when to conform to the DMCA and when to ignore it. As the DMCA mandates, Google also provides webmasters with the ability to have their content reinstated if they submit a counter notification to Google. Until that action is taken, we will comply with the DMCA and keep the contested pages out of our index. If you'd like more information on this topic, you can find it here:

www.google.com/dmca.html or by searching Google for "DMCA"

(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-885 9-1&q=dmca).

We appreciate your interest in this issue and your taking the time to express your opinion.

Sincerely, The Google Team

Subject: Google runs ad, then rejects it
From: Kristi Wachter <humanrights@racerrecords.com>
Message-ID: <3c9b6ff1$1@news2.lightlink.com>
Date: 22 Mar 2002 12:54:57 -0500

Wow.

I ran an ad on Google this morning (with mixed feelings; I've been a Google fan for ages and, while I'm deeply dismayed that they removed xenu.net links in response to Scientology's DMCA complaint, I still like them a lot ... for the time being, anyway) -

Anyway, I figured with all the publicity lately, it might be a good time to try out the ads on Google.

So I bought a regular AdWords ad:

Scientology Lies!

& breaks the law & hurts people.

Get informed & get involved!

www.scientology-lies.com

The link went to http://www.scientology-lies.com/investigation.html .

Within just a few hours, I'd already run through the little bit of money I wanted to spend. (I got over 150 clickthroughs, according to my Google report.)

So I figured I'd try their other program, AdWords Select.

I submitted the exact same ad text.

Within about an hour after I submitted this same ad to the AdWords Select program, I got an e-mail from Google saying they wouldn't run it because "At this time, we are not running ads for sites that promote hate against another group or business."

I am stunned.

I wrote back, informing them that my site doesn't promote hate and asking why they thought it does.

I'm curious whether they have a different policy for AdWords vs. AdWords Select, or whether they changed their policy in the last hour or so.

Their letter and my reply are below.

Kristi

==============================================

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 08:57:22 -0800
Message-ID: <4491466.1016816242430.JavaMail.root@exyy34>
From: adwords-support@google.com
To: googleads@racerrecords.com Subject: Changes to your Google Adwords campaign

Hello Kristi Wachter,

We are not able to run the following ad(s) in Ad Group #1, of Campaign #1 you have created using the Google AdWords Select Advertising Program:

Scientology Lies!

& breaks the law & hurts people.

Get informed & get involved!

www.scientology-lies.com

Thank you for advertising on Google. At this time, we are not running ads for sites that promote hate against another group or business. We review ads on a case-by-case basis and reserve the right to not run certain ads, or certain categories of ads. Due to our current ads policy, we are unable to run your ad on Google.

Google believes strongly in freedom of expression and therefore offers broad access to content across the web without censoring results. At the same time, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site, as noted in our advertising terms and conditions. Please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver.

Sincerely,

The Google AdWords Team

-------

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 10:21:10 -0700
From: Kristi Wachter <racer@racerrecords.com>
To: adwords-support@google.com Subject: Re: Changes to your Google Adwords campaign

Hi there,

I was most surprised to receive the e-mail below.

The site I wish to advertise does not promote hate. What made you think it does?

Does this policy apply to both the Adwords and Adwords Select programs?

I anxiously await your reply.

Thank you,

Kristi

-- Kristi Wachter the activist formerly known as "Jour" (before $cientology outed me)

If I am not who you say I am, then you are not who you think you are.

- James Baldwin

I think $cientology is hurting people and breaking the law, and I want them to stop it. See http://www.scientology-lies.com for more.

From: 61 <data61@netscape.net>
Subject: Google story
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 12:33:33 -0600
Organization: NE of the Funny Farm
Message-ID: <3C9B78FD.77C9CC7E@netscape.net>

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&q=scientology

with a link to:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/internet/03/22/google.reut/index.html

right up at the top.

John

From: Pito Poquito <pitito@newsguy.com>
Subject: Three cheers for Andreas...
Date: 22 Mar 2002 10:35:56 -0800
Organization: ARSCC (wdne)
Message-ID: <a7ftic0e0b@drn.newsguy.com>

In article <a7f7sj$m3j@netaxs.com>, rkeller@netaxs.com says...

>
>Here's some other newspapers that carried a story on the Google/Xenu.net
>scandal. Most of them took the Reuters article, some translated into
>German.

(Including the San Jose Mercury News and many others.)

Andreas, the publicity on this issue has been utterly fantastic. It's almost as if newspapers, webzines, and Reuters is getting a wicked pleasure out of reporting it.

"In news today, the CoS has required ISPs not to use the URL www.xenu.net. That's www.xenu.net."

"Did we mention the URL was www.xenu.net?"

Thanks Rod for collecting all these references.

Many many congratulations, Andreas!

>Bocholter-Borkener Volksblatt
>Business 2.0
>The Globe and Mail
>Heise Online
>Independant Media Center
>Lycos News
>The Namibian Newspaper
>NGZ Online
>Orange County Weekly
>The Register
>RP Online
>Siliconvalley Online
>The Times of India
>Wired News
>ZD Net News
>
>--

From: galt_57@hotmail.com (Dave)
Subject: Google Restores Web Page Critical of Scientology
Date: 22 Mar 2002 10:38:45 -0800
Message-ID: <5591d176.0203221038.2ca92ecd@posting.google.com>

Google Restores Web Page;

<http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020322/wr_nm/tech_google_dc>

From: ©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/ <zerpe@wineasy.se>
Subject: The New York Times: Technology Briefing: Internet. GOOGLE REMOVES ANTI-SCIENTOLOGY LINKS
Distribution: world Organization: ARSCC Sweden. Department for OSA surveillance.
Message-ID: <736n9ugum6t6msvg9njnir81v0srjlnrht@The.Fifth.Galactic.Invader.Force>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 20:48:21 GMT

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/22/technology/22TBRF1.html?tntemail0

GOOGLE REMOVES ANTI-SCIENTOLOGY LINKS Google Inc. said it had removed some links to an anti-Scientology Web site from its popular search engine this week after the Church of Scientology told it that the linked pages infringed on church copyrights. The pages were part of Operation Clambake (xenu.net), a site based in Norway that is a well-known hub for critics of Scientology. The church cited the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a 1998 law that can make it illegal to link to copyright-infringing material. Andreas Heldal-Lund, the owner of Operation Clambake, said the material fell under the fair-use provision of copyright law, and that he would ask Google to restore the links. David F. Gallagher (NYT)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

-- --------------------------------------------------------------------- The goal of the [cult's] department [of governmental affairs in its OSA] is to bring the government and hostile philosophies or societies into a state of complete compliance with the goals of Scientology.

This is done by a high level ability to control and in its absence by a low level ability to overwhelm. Introvert such agencies. Control such agencies.

- L. Ron Hubbard --------------------------------------------------------------------- ******* Body thetans? We don't need no stinking Body Thetans! ******* *********** http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/index.htm ************ IRC #Scientology JavaChat http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/irc.html * Multimedia: http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/multimed/index.htm * ******************* zerpe@wineasy.se (Anti-Cult) ******************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Google runs ad, then rejects it
From: Kristi Wachter <humanrights@racerrecords.com>
Message-ID: <3c9bc501@news2.lightlink.com>
Date: 22 Mar 2002 18:57:53 -0500

Points for Google: at least they answer my e-mails quickly.

----------------------------------------

From: help@google.com
Subject: Re: Changes to your Google Adwords campaign [#203295]

Hello Kristi,

Thank you for your email.

My apologies for the confusion. We understand that you are not promoting hate on your site. The email you received was not worded clearly. It should have read:

"At this time, we are not running ads for sites that advocate against an individual, group or organization. We review ads on a case-by-case basis and reserve the right to not run certain ads, or certain categories of ads. Due to our current ads policy, we are unable to run your ad on Google."

This policy does indeed apply to both AdWords and AdWords Select.

Again, please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver.

Please feel free to email us at adwords@google.com with further questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

The Google AdWords Team

------------------------------

From: Kristi Wachter <info@scientology-lies.com>
To: adwords@google.com Subject: Re: Changes to your Google Adwords campaign [#203295]

Thank you for your prompt reply.

However, I remain confused by your implementation of the stated policy.

When was it created?

I ask because you DID run the exact same ad earlier this morning, and furthermore, after you refused my ad, I have seen ads appear at Google for the Democratic party, specifically advocating against the Republicans, and for DemocraticUnderground.com, whose Web site says, "Democratic Underground (DU) was founded on Inauguration Day, January 20, 2001, to protest the illegitimate presidency of George W. Bush ..." and "This website exists so our members and guests are assured that there are many others across the country who share their outrage at the unilateral, arrogant, and extreme right-wing approach taken by George W. Bush and his team, the conservative Republicans in Congress, and the five conservative partisans on the Supreme Court."

(http://www.democraticunderground.com/about.html).

The ads I'm referring to read as follows:

Democratic Underground The top site on the web for people who believe in democracy & freedom.

DemocraticUnderground.com

Enrongate & G.W. Bush The right wing media is trying to protect Bush, but he can't hide!

www.democrats.com/enron

Does Google not consider these sites to be "advocat[ing] against an individual, group or organization"?

Finally, I was unable to find the policy you mention in your Terms and Conditions. Has the policy been made public at the Google site? If not, why not?

Thanking you in advance for further clarification,

Kristi Wachter

-- -- Kristi Wachter the activist formerly known as "Jour" (before $cientology outed me)

If I am not who you say I am, then you are not who you think you are.

- James Baldwin

I think $cientology is hurting people and breaking the law, and I want them to stop it. See http://www.scientology-lies.com for more.

Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:10:03 -0800
From: "A. Melon" <juicy@melontraffickers.com>
Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above.

It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.

Please report problems or inappropriate use to the remailer administrator at abuse@melontraffickers.com.

Please read http://melontraffickers.com/remailer.html before contacting the remailer administrator.

X-Invalid: mail2news@dizum.com Subject: Geek.Com Editorial on scn/google/xenu
Message-ID: <ad53904a422bb98cc8c8a5b32134d5d2@melontraffickers.com>

http://geek.com/news/geeknews/2002mar/gee20020322010860.htm

after the main scn/google/xenu story, this entirely dead on editorial appears:

ROB'S OPINION WAKE UP!!! This story should get your attention. Google removes links without notice, to any alleged copyright infringing material. There's apparently no auditing process for link removal other than - "whoosh!

it's gone!" Who knows what other information we are being denied by the search engine that so many of us hold dear: Google.

I know many attorneys, so perhaps I should make some claims that competitors to Geek.com are infringing on the DMCA and get them kicked out of Google to improve my results. I could also claim that sites mocking Geek.com are infringing on copyrights.

It's pretty obvious that as long as the DMCA exists, Google searches will not be complete. Google is a business and they follow the law. Is it Google's job to bring down the DMCA? If Google won't do it, then who will? It seemed like a victory to some that Xenu.net was re-listed, but what about other anti-Scientology sites that are still stifled? This is just the first needle in a huge haystack of copyright infringement claims, and a sick law entitled DMCA which requires service providers to cut off allegedly infringing materials without any due process, or face potential legal action.

Any site or provider should be allowed to link to anything. If there is a problem with the source material, that source material should be targeted and removed, but hyperlinks should not be stifled. Until them, peer-to-peer searching technologies will be the only pure source of information available to users. Unfortunately, peer-to-peer technology is still in its infancy. Above all else, I believe in the free exchange of information. When laws start infringing on that, they are broken.

From: "FACTNet International" <manage@factnet.org>
Subject: Scientology Google Scandal. News Hyperlinks
Organization: FACTNet International
Message-ID: <8AQm8.12809$To6.4149673@e420r-atl1.usenetserver.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 18:07:40 -0800

For those of you who are archiving pages connected to the current Scientology disaster (FACTNet is not archiving it.) Please add to this ever-growing list of beacons of light that are illuminating this noxious cult's behaviour.

Please, too, click on these links. Newspapers need to know that covering Scientology scandals is good for business.

Clicks mean eyeballs. Eyeballs means advertising revenue. Give them the clicks they need to justify running more stories about the dark side of this cult.....

The current Scientology scandal regarding GOOGLE is being covered by these websites:

http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/opinion/story/0,24330,3377400,00.html http://www.morons.org/articles/7/1472 http://www.metafilter.com/comments.mefi/15684 http://geek.com/news/geeknews/2002mar/gee20020322010860.htm http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/internet/03/22/google.reut/index.html http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020322/wr_nm/tech_google _dc_2 http://reuters.com/news_article.jhtml;jsessionid=WRKEFR0K1SCWGCRBAEOCFEYKEEA RKIWD?type=internetnews&StoryID=730033 http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/business/technology/2910195.htm http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-866058.html http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,51233,00.html http://news.com.com/2100-1023-865936.html http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/3/20/8222/92911 http://slashdot.org/yro/02/03/21/0453200.shtml?tid=99 http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=scientology http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=154205&group=webcast http://www.operatingthetan.com/google/ http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jo-21.03.02-001/

The origins of Scientology's efforts to censor the Internet is discussed in these pages:

http://www.operatingthetan.com/google/ http://www.xtdnet.nl/paul/PrioriyTelecom-Xenu.html http://www2.thecia.net/users/rnewman/scientology/home.html http://www.xs4all.nl/~felipe/cos/ http://www.cyberlaw.com/cylw0495.html http://www.rickross.com/reference/Scien30.html http://www.skeptic.com/03.3.jl-jj-scientology.html http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/CoS/ http://www.watchman.org/sci/c0$p1.htm http://atheism.about.com/cs/scientologyvsth/ http://cisar.org/010319b.htm http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/1999/06/07/editorial1.html http://www.factnet.org/briefing.htm

This list of hyperlinks is being kept at:

http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/Google_Scientology.html

IOHO FACTNet Staff

--------------

F.A.C.T.Net, Inc.

PO Box 3135 Boulder, CO 80307-3135 USA

* Web site http://www.factnet.org/ * E-mail mailto:factnet@factnet.org * Donations http://www.factnet.org/donation.htm * Donations by PayPal. Account = manage@factnet.org * Subscriptions to Newsletters http://www.factnet.org/Subscribe.html

F.A.C.T.Net is a non-profit 501(c)(3) news source, referral service, and archive protecting freedom of mind from harms caused by psychological coercion.

Re-distribution and proper re-posting of this document is appreciated.

Please use proper net etiquette when doing so.

From: ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT cryptofortress DOT com>
Subject: Google also spying on you?
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 20:36:28 -0500
Organization: ARS: Perhaps the Most Malignant Newsgroup on Usenet
Message-ID: <10nn9ucjmpo2uk8ao2f76gsiqdqu6et67j@4ax.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bVykYohCktv15FdZkb95cVtQtNI=

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=29856&cid=3207393

PageRank tweaks are a minor problem (Score:2, Interesting) by Everyman on Friday March 22, @10:55AM (#3207393) (User #197621 Info | http://slashdot.org/) There is one thing that's scarier than Google's willingness to compromise the PageRank system at the first hint of a perceived inconvenience. That's their completely inadequate privacy policy.

It's boiler-plate: they say they'll change it whenever they like, but there's no mention of whether the previous data they've collected would fall under the old or new policy. Add to this the fact that the ownership and control of Google will most likely be shifting over the next few years, if Google goes public.

Bill Gates could buy the whole thing with the loose change he carries in his pocket.

Google apparently has no interest in destroying old data, and intends to keep it all as long as possible. It's a potential gold mine as a corporate asset, and a potential disaster in terms of civil liberties and privacy.

Google has no good reason for collecting any of the data they collect; they just do it.

They claim that none of it is "personally identifiable," without mentioning the fact that many IP numbers are static, and even if they aren't, new laws give the feds the power to make it "personally identifiable" without probable cause.

Google's outrageous cookie policy just makes it that much easier to tie it all together, for those who don't erase cookies frequently.

Google sets a cookie that expires in 2038 for anyone who visits any page of theirs and doesn't already have a Google cookie. They use a unique ID number in their cookie, and with this number they also log the Internet address (IP) number, date and time, search terms, and browser information. This is both unnecessary and scary.

There is nothing more revealing about a person than a history of that person's Google search terms. (Some of us use the Internet for something other than merely selling more and more widgets.)

Since Congress passed the Patriot Act last October, a showing of probable cause is not required for pen register or trap-and-trace information, and judges must grant the order. The definition of this sort of surveillance has been expanded for the Internet, and now includes "other dialing, routing, addressing, and signaling information." Search terms for engines such as Google are part of the URL address. The law's exclusion of "content" for this surveillance -- language that refers to the body of email messages -- is insufficient to exclude Web search terms in the URL. The FBI could set up Carnivore at Google (the feds will be happy to fork over the cost of any needed hardware or software), and we wouldn't even know about it. Similarly, the FBI can present a court order for Google's logs, from a judge who was required to sign without a showing of probable cause.

I was able to get the CIA to instantly withdraw their cookies this week. That's because even the CIA is accountable to the public (on the cookie issue at least) under federal guidelines. But there is no accountability for Google, even though the data they have collected is more revealing than anything the CIA has collected recently, by orders of magnitude.

How long before the feds zero in on Google's data? Why can't Google abandon most cookie use, and destroy logs after 30 days?

If they sit on their data without doing anything about their policies, they may wake up one day and discover that the feds have appropriated the entire thing.

Already it may be too late; there's at least one former National Security Agency employee with a top secret clearance who is now a Google software engineer.

-- Daniel Brandt Public Information Research, Inc.

Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology From: kady@wwwaif.net (kady@wwwaif.net)
Subject: How Ava Paquette Hoodwinked Google
Message-ID: <a7h3fc$2c0_002@news1.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 05:22:52 GMT
Organization: Bell Sympatico

From www.digl-watch.com/copyright.htm:

Did Ava Paquette commit fraud when she smuggled trademark complaints inside her now infamous DMCA complaint to Google?

The recent furor over popular Internet search engine Google's decision to remove links to pages on a Norwegian website critical of Scientology have raised many questions over the liability of linking for Internet Service Providers, search engines and other entities granted specific limited indemnity under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

After the removal of the links to www.xenu.net became public knowledge, the company found itself on the defensive. Its decision to remove the links to the Xenu.net pages caused the company massive amounts of bad publicity after making Google and Scientology the subject of dozens of news stories, both online and in the non-net-based press.

In response to questions over why the links had been first removed, then hastily replaced after the onslaught of criticism, a spokesperson for Google indicated that the main page at www.xenu.net had been removed "inadvertently".

This attempt to make the deletion look like some sort of clerical error is unconvincing. In the DMCA complaint to Google, Scientology lawyer Ava Paquette repeatedly referred to the URL www.xenu.net in terms of it being a specific page -- and that it contained infringing material that was actionable under the DMCA.

Google, apparently, relied on the assumption that Ms. Paquette was acting in good faith, "under penalty of perjury", as is explicitly stated as part of a formal DMCA complaint.

It appears quite clear now that she was not.

Ms. Paquette, on behalf of her client, the Church of Scientology, seems to have deliberately mixed trademark and copyright claims, hoping -- as it turns out, correctly -- that Google would not realize that while alleged copyright violation could behoove the search engine to take action to remove links to the site, federal trademark infringement claims are entirely outside of the provisions of the DMCA.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First, a little background on search engines, copyright violation and the DMCA --

Under the law, search engines, or "information retrieval tools", as they are referred to in the legislation, are protected from liability for contributory or direct infringement -- provided that they act "expeditiously" to remove links to the allegedly infringing copyrighted material after receiving notification under the process outlined by the Act:

(From SEC. 512. LIMITATIONS ON LIABILITY FOR copyright violation)

(d) INFORMATION LOCATION TOOLS - A service provider shall not be liable for monetary relief, or, except as provided in subsection (j), for injunctive or other equitable relief, for infringement of copyright by reason of the provider referring or linking users to an online location containing infringing material or infringing activity, by using information location tools, including a directory, index, reference, pointer, or hypertext link, if the service provider--

`(1)(A) does not have actual knowledge that the material or activity is infringing;

`(B) in the absence of such actual knowledge, is not aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent; or

`(C) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material;

`(2) does not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity, in a case in which the service provider has the right and ability to control such activity; and

`(3) upon notification of claimed infringement as described in subsection (c)(3), responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity, except that, for purposes of this paragraph, the information described in subsection (c)(3)(A)(iii) shall be identification of the reference or link, to material or activity claimed to be infringing, that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate that reference or link.

Google, like other popular search engines Alta Vista and Lycos, even offers specific contact and process information to potential complainants on exactly how to submit such a complaint:

To file a notice of infringement with us, you must provide a written communication (by fax or regular mail, and not by email) that sets forth the items specified below. Please note that you will be liable for damages (including costs and attorneys' fees) if you materially misrepresent that a product or activity is infringing your copyrights. Accordingly, if you are not sure whether certain material of yours is protected by copyright laws, we suggest that you first contact an attorney.

To expedite our ability to process your request, please use the following format (including section numbers):

1. Identify in sufficient detail the copyrighted work that you believe has been infringed.

For example, "The copyrighted work at issue is the text that appears on www.google.com/ads."

2. Identify the material that you claim is infringing the copyrighted work listed in item #1 above.

(For more information on the DMCA notification and counter-notification procedure, visit Dr. David Touretzky's excellent DMCA complaint resource.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, back to Ms. Paquette's DMCA claim to Google.

In her complaint to Google, Paquette, on behalf of her client, the Religious Technology Centre, combined her DMCA complaint about Google's links to alleged copyright violations within the Xenu.net website with an entirely separate complaint related to alleged trademark infringements through metatags -- obfuscating the fact that such a claim lies outside of the DMCA process entirely.

Within her list of page locations of allegedly "infringing" materials, Ava Paquette also puts forward the argument that Xenu.net, and its subpages, also violate her client's trademarks by including the words "Scientology", "Hubbard", "Dianetics" and "NOTS" as metatags. Although this specific complaint has absolutely no place within a DMCA complaint, it allowed her to artfully combine the main page with the subpages in an unrelated context.

At no point within the complaint does Paquette specifically claim that the main page contains copyright violations. Since the DMCA does not cover trademark infringements, which is what Ava is claiming the home page is, one has to ask -- Why is the main page included within her list or urls at all?

The DMCA was established to deal exclusively with links to alleged copyright violations. As such, by deliberately mixing two separate complaints of infringement by xenu.net (copyright and trademark), Ava Paquette, acting as an agent for both the copyright and the trademark holders, was able to successfully trick Google into removing links to the main Xenu.net page -- DESPITE the fact that her complaints about metatag trademark infringement are not covered under the DMCA notification process.

There was, and is, no reason at all for Google to have removed links to that page from its database. It does not in any way indemnify the search engine from liability, since there is absolutely no reason - or, for that matter, precedent - to suggest that a search engine would be held liable for contributory infringement on the mere basis that it links to a page that contains an alleged trademark infringement.

By smuggling trademark into her DMCA complaint, however, Ava Paquette seems to have managed to fool Google into thinking it was somehow avoiding liability under the limited indemnity under the DMCA, when in fact, Google's links to the main Xenu.net page are not in any way covered by the notification process.

The attempt at deception becomes obvious upon analysis of the specific wording used in her complaint.

In her letter, Ava Paquette states:

Currently, Google is providing a link to a web page which contains literally hundreds of our clients' copyrighted works and federally registered trademarks. This web site is "www.xenu.net." This particular web site, "www.xenu.net", has been removed five times by well known internet service providers here in the United States for the precise copyright and trademark infringements of which I am notifying Google.

I have attached a Chart for you setting forth each of the infringements that are contained on the "www.xenu.net" web site and proof of our clients' ownership of the works and trademarks in question.

This particular web site owner has placed our clients' copyrighted works and federally registered trademarks on his web page without the authorization of our clients.

According, his actions are in violation of United States copyright law and I request Google either remove or disable access to the web site, "www.xenu.net".

The Search Query used is: Scientology Infringing Web Page: www.xenu.net

In the first sentence, she alleges that Google is providing a link to a "web page" which contains "literally hundreds" of allegedly infringing material, including both "copyrighted works" and "federally registered trademarks".

Obviously, the single page to which the link www.xenu.net directs a user does not, and cannot, contain "hundreds" of infringement of any kind - it is the doorway to a web site. And it is the web site, made up of hundreds of different web pages, that contains these "hundreds" of alleged infringements.

In the very next sentence, in fact, she switches terms, and refers to the "web site" itself at having been removed from a number of ISPs for these alleged infringements. She continues to refer to the object of her complaint as a "web site" for the purposes of the following sentence, and indicates that she has sent a chart, with the full URLS of the offending web page URLs.

But in the next sentence, she refers again to the "web page" when suggesting that the owner "has placed ... copyrighted works and federally registered trademarks on his web page" without the authorization of her clients.

Ava Paquette has now successfully dodged the requirement of including a specific complaint of copyright violation on the web page to which the URL www.xenu.net directs a user by couching the URL in her litany of alleged infringements contained in other pages.

She then goes on to demand that Google disable access to the web site "www.xenu.net", despite the fact that her only infringement claim that appears at that specific URL is of trademark use in metatags. In fact, she specifically states that the "Infringing Web Page" is "www.xenu.net", fully aware the alleged infringement to which she refers is not covered under the DMCA, as it relates to trademarks, and not copyrighted material. However, because of the ambiguous wording of the preceding paragraph, the deliberate combining of two different kinds of infringement claims and her misuse of the term "web page", Ava Paquette successfully bamboozles Google into believing that its links to www.xenu.net represent a potential liability, and the URL is removed from Google's database.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This DMCA notification sent to Google was at best misleading. At worst, it could be seen as a deliberate misrepresentation of facts, and a fraud on Google itself, which relied on the material evidence presented to make a decision which caused considerable negative publicity and damage to its reputation.

It also indicates the extreme priority that Scientology places on its goal of flooding critical sites out of the top list of hits returned by a search for the word "Scientology" on Google, and the organization -- and Ms. Paquette's -- apparent willingness to abuse the DMCA process to silence its critics without the risk of actually filing a suit over infringement that might ultimately prove unsuccessful.

It is up to search engines like Google, as well as ISPs and all other potential recipients of similarly misleading DMCAs to ensure that they examine carefully exactly what claims are being made, what action is required for the preservation of third party indemnity, and most importantly, what recourse can be taken against a copyright or trademark holder who would attempt to use invalid DMCA complaints as an indirect method of shutting down access to material it finds objectionable.

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Reuters: Andreas won't challenge Google
Date: 23 Mar 2002 14:52:44 GMT
Message-ID: <a7i4rs$ffk@netaxs.com>

Norwegian won't challenge Google in Scientology case Reuters Friday March 22 By Elinor Mills Abreu http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/020322/n22206750_1.html

SAN FRANCISCO - A Norwegian man whose hobby is criticizing the Church of Scientology on the Internet said on Friday he did not plan to challenge the removal of most of his Web sites from Google search results because that would put him at risk of being sued in the United States.

Andreas Heldal-Lund said Google Inc. notified him in an e-mail on Thursday that a long list of his Web sites were removed from results of the popular search engine because the Church of Scientology had complained that they contained church-owned copyrights.

Citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the Church asked Google to remove the Web sites. Under the law, Mountain View, California-based Google can protect itself from being held liable by immediately removing the sites, the company said in its e-mail to Heldal-Lund.

In a phone interview with Reuters, Heldal-Lund said Google soon replaced the home page, www.xenu.net, saying trademarks are not covered under the DMCA and the Church had claimed that page violated its trademark.

However, Linda Simmons Hight, a spokeswoman for the Church of Scientology, said on Friday that the organization only complained to Google about Web sites that it felt violated copyrights and not trademarks.

A Google spokesman said the company declined to comment further on the matter on Friday.

As many as a hundred other sites maintained by Heldal-Lund remain blocked from the Google results, although they could be reinstated, according to a lawyer for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Under the DMCA, after notifying the Web master of the sites that are removed and receiving "counter-notification," Google could replace the sites, said Robin Gross, a staff attorney for the San Francisco-based EFF, an organization that advocates free speech online.

Hight denied that the Church was trying to silence its critics.

"There are certain people who are attempting to make this a free speech issue. That's a red herring," she said. "We have been in favor of free speech since before these people were born."

Hight said the Church is merely trying to protect its intellectual property, but she also complained that the anti-Scientology Web sites have incited violence against Church members.

'NORMAL NORWEGIAN GUY'

Heldal-Lund, 37, denied any wrongdoing. "I live in Norway under Norwegian law. The servers are in Norway and Holland," he told Reuters. "According to the laws, how I understand them, I'm not breaking any laws. It's fair use. If a Norwegian court tells me I'm in breach of the law, I'll comply."

In the United States and other countries, fair use provisions allow people limited use of copyrighted material for educational, entertainment and other purposes.

Heldal-Lund said he was surprised Google removed his sites from the Google results without telling him first, but said that he was wary of challenging that action.

"In the DMCA, to file a counter-claim or notification I need to submit to American jurisdiction and I can't do that," Heldal-Lund said. The Church "could file a case against me in America, and I can't travel all the way over there for that."

Heldal-Lund said he was consulting with lawyers to figure out what he could do to get his Web sites back in Google's search results.

Although the sites are accessible if you know the exact Web address, most visitors are likely to reach them via a search engine.

Heldal-Lund said he became interested in the Los Angeles-based Church of Scientology in 1996 after hearing that a Norwegian citizen successfully sued the Church for fraud.

"They've threatened me for five years (over the Web sites) but haven't dared sue me," he said. "I'm just a normal Norwegian guy with the belief that this has to be done."

From: Caroline Letkeman <carolinel@telus.net>
Subject: Re: Reuters: Andreas won't challenge Google
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 08:09:37 -0800
Message-ID: <rr9p9u0a5ad817a2rmjca8dj1u4oskc247@4ax.com>

On 23 Mar 2002 14:52:44 GMT, rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller) wrote:

>Norwegian won't challenge Google in Scientology case
>Reuters
>Friday March 22
>By Elinor Mills Abreu
>http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/020322/n22206750_1.html
>
>SAN FRANCISCO - A Norwegian man whose hobby is criticizing the Church of
>Scientology on the Internet said on Friday he did not plan to challenge
>the removal of most of his Web sites from Google search results because
>that would put him at risk of being sued in the United States.
>
>Andreas Heldal-Lund said Google Inc. notified him in an e-mail on Thursday
>that a long list of his Web sites were removed from results of the popular
>search engine because the Church of Scientology had complained that they
>contained church-owned copyrights.
>
>Citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the Church asked Google to
>remove the Web sites. Under the law, Mountain View, California-based
>Google can protect itself from being held liable by immediately removing
>the sites, the company said in its e-mail to Heldal-Lund.
>
>In a phone interview with Reuters, Heldal-Lund said Google soon replaced
>the home page, www.xenu.net, saying trademarks are not covered under the
>DMCA and the Church had claimed that page violated its trademark.
>
>However, Linda Simmons Hight, a spokeswoman for the Church of Scientology,
>said on Friday that the organization only complained to Google about Web
>sites that it felt violated copyrights and not trademarks.

Linda Simmons Hight is a spokesperson for Scientology's Vulture Minister hearse-chasing program.

http://www.volunteerministers.org/eng/news/page08.htm

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT:

Linda Simmons Hight Phone: (323) 960-3500 Fax: (323) 960-3508 e-mail: mediarelations@scientology.net

<snip>

Caroline

From: Zed <hendersn@zeta.org.au>
Subject: A note on Scientology vs Google
Message-ID: <slrna9p64e.dt.hendersn@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 14:53:49 GMT
Organization: Pacific Internet (Australia)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

While Google's relisting of www.xenu.net is a good thing, there's another issue which I think deserves attention. In the wake of Google's delisting of xenu.net, several people have attempted to put up advertisements for xenu.net through Google's Adwords and Adwords Select services. While initially accepting them, Google has since sent letters of rejection to Kristi Wachter on a.r.s., "Biff Cool" on www.kuro5hin.org and "Joe Shmoe" on slashdot.org. Why? Google's initial stated reason to Kristi said "At this time, we are not running ads for sites that promote hate against another group or business," essentially accusing xenu.net of being a hate site. Since then, the rejection text has softened considerably to "At this time, we are not running ads for sites that advocate against any individual, group, or organization."

I have never heard of Google's ads working under any such policy before, and I believe it has only just now been implemented. I think there is grounds to suspect that the Church of Scientology has threatened Google with either a defamation lawsuit or prosecution for hate speech if they continue to run ads for Operation Clambake.

People familiar with the old Guardian's Office may recall that "ops" run against enemies were designed to attack an enemy via 3 different "channels", or avenues of attack, at once. See http://www.shipbrook.com/jeff/CoS/docs/strtman.html for an example (Check out the other docs there as well if you haven't already - they're _nasty_).

If this policy is continued by OSA, then the attack on Google would have three different channels. It may look something like this:

Channel A: flood Google with as many Scientology-owned sites as possible, all linking to each other, to overwhelm any representation of critical sites.

Channel B: Use legal threats to force the removal of any critical site that still shows up in early search results

Channel C: Use legal threats to prevent any critical sites being advertised.

This would effectively prevent a person looking for "Scientology" on Google from ever seeing anything critical of Scientology unless they were already looking for critical information.

Of course, advertising is a different ballgame from search engine results.

There is also no proof that Google has received any such threats. I have sent an e-mail to Google asking when they started their policy of "no advocacy against any individual, group or organization", and whether or not they were threatened with legal action if they carried advertisements for www.xenu.net. I'll post any answer I receive.

Zed -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEVAwUBPJyYiysxIzhyTOOxAQHQngf/XHloJjk0nB2f7tzZiWw7LE+4nYby4vZM DvYDxVn0Xf0i/TQqh/+xO0fcp6Jw/47HjS3YXTr8Ykklnx3HAGzrRZR40NaLXvj6 Mf2C6VVGUy3W4PhDqqmEMz599lbXGUuYToy6bv5TI28BWvwDP5jCMEC+Cm/8ZQCX z8oNwlizgbLezXYPreUMuLtA3lsr0Aejvm4wP7GoVWV+Lp3bMYw8tUioMrlVNRZ+ RVQOWP+qZsuX5C9VhsC8d2lH6SAnMhY0e3fLuZrGQ+vxDeWcZD2sIx15VcuouTVv Droodr0X/+fdST4BshlSTj5yxoIX/KdKi1lbX4OGBiyT1n9XtQLUdg== =jOXu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Silicon.com: Xenu.net
Date: 23 Mar 2002 15:01:44 GMT
Message-ID: <a7i5co$ffk@netaxs.com>

Google U-turn in Scientology row Silicon.com Friday 22nd March 2002 http://silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?REQUNIQ=1016895588&REQSESS=6936813&3001REQEVENT=&REQINT1=52212&REQAUTH=21046

John Travolta and Tom Cruise none too pleased presumably...

Google has been forced to reinstate a link to an anti-scientology website following pressure from free speech advocates.

On Wednesday the search engine removed links to xenu.net in what it claimed was a response to a copyright infringement claim by lawyers representing the Church of Scientology.

But by Thursday the link to the site was restored just before Google was due to meet with free speech activists who were concerned about the reason for the removal of the links.

Xenu.net's definition of Scientology is rather contentious and reads: "The Church of Scientology is a vicious and dangerous cult that masquerades as a religion. Its purpose is to make money.

"It practices a variety of mind-control techniques on people lured into its midst to gain control over their money and their lives. Its aim is to take from them every penny that they have and can ever borrow and to also enslave them to further its wicked ends."

From: heffer@scientologylies.com (Heffer)
Subject: Kobrin's DMCA Lies
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 15:15:02 GMT
Organization: ARSCC
Message-ID: <3c9c9a96.11177136@news2.lightlink.com>

Said Helena Kobrin in the Reuters article on MSNBC:

"We don’t abuse this act," the lawyer, Helena Kobrin of the Los Angeles firm of Moxin & Kobrin said of the DMCA. "We go very strictly by what the copyright laws are."

Perhaps H.Kobrin can inform the newsreading public as to the basis for invocation of the DMCA in relation to the E-Meter, an item sold for money by the CofS and yet barred from public resale on EBay by Scientology lawyers making DMCA demands that the meter be removed from resale.

This *despite* the fact the these E-meters are traded between Scientologists in a public sales forum.

Heffer, OSA Lackey, H-Group #315905 on the Dorian List

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Cosmiverse: Xenu.net
Date: 23 Mar 2002 15:15:46 GMT
Message-ID: <a7i672$ffk@netaxs.com>

Google Removes Anti-Church Websites Cosmiverse.com March 22, 2002 http://www.cosmiverse.com/tech03220202.html

The Church of Scientology has managed to get Google to remove references to anti-Scientology websites from the search engine. According to Wired News, Scientology lawyers, citing the controversial Digital Millennium Copyright Act, are claiming that Google may no longer include anti-Scientology sites that allegedly infringe upon the church's intellectual property.

Wired News cites a letter from Google to the Xenu.net Scientology-protest site that reads: "We removed certain specific URLs in response to a notification.... Had we not removed these URLs, we would be subject to a claim for copyright infringement, regardless of its merits."

So far, the DMCA has only come under fire because it bans most attempts to bypass or disable copy-protection technology. Scientology is relying on another section of the 1998 law, which says a "service provider shall not be liable" for copyright infringements, if it moves with dispatch to delete any "reference or link to material or activity claimed to be infringing."

Until recently, anyone typing in "Scientology" on the wildly popular search engine found references to the Xenu.net site in the first page of results. Now Xenu.net and clambake.org have virtually disappeared from Google's database, Wired reports. Scientology must claim that its copyrighted material has been unlawfully expropriated in order to use the DMCA as a legal avenue.

Infringing site include: Excerpts from an internal report on a Scientology member who died under mysterious circumstances after allegedly being held against her will, and photographs of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard and others juxtaposed with Adolf Hitler.

According to Wired News, this isn't the first time Scientology has used copyright threats to stifle criticism. In August 1995, Scientology sued one of its former members for posting anti-church information to the Internet and persuaded a federal judge to permit the seizure of his computer.

The church then sued The Washington Post for reporting on the computer seizure and quoting from public court records. Last November, Scientology used the DMCA to pressure a U.S. Internet provider to remove the church's secret scriptures from the scientology-kills.org site.

DMCA threats from the church seem to be becoming so common that Dave Touretzsky, a scientist at Carnegie Mellon, has even drafted a form letter that can be sent in reply. Since Xenu.net and its companion sites are in Norway, Scientology can't use U.S. law to remove the pages directly.

In getting Google to delete them from its mammoth database, the church hopes to remove one of the most obvious ways that Internet users can stumble across the sites. Xenu.net, on the other hand, does have the option to reply to Google. Xenu.net can try to make its way back into the database by refuting Scientology's claims.

The DMCA does offer that way out, but Xenu.net's publisher would have to agree to the jurisdiction of a U.S. court. One Internet executive in the Netherlands told Wired News earlier this week that Scientology "harassed"

him and his upstream providers for years because he hosted an anti-Scientology site.

Hubbard's secret scriptures teach that 75 million years ago, an evil galactic overlord named Xenu solved the galaxy's overpopulation problem by freezing excess people and transporting the bodies to Teegeeack, now called Earth. After the hapless travelers were defrosted, they were chained to volcanoes that were blown up by hydrogen bombs, and their disembodied spirits continue to haunt mankind today, Wired News reports.

From: me@Xjohnnyasia.com (Johnny Asia)
Subject: Church of Scientology - STIFLING CRITICISM
Message-ID: <3c9ca427.585314@news.mybizz.net>
Organization: BiznessOnline.com, Inc.
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 16:20:18 GMT

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020322/wr_nm/tech_google_dc_4&cid=582

Google Restores Web Page Critical of Scientology Fri Mar 22, By Elinor Mills Abreu

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Google Inc. restored a Web site critical of the Church of Scientology on its Internet search engine on Thursday while free speech advocates slammed the company for removing the site in the first place.

Google said the company had only removed certain pages from the site because of a copyright dispute.

STIFLING CRITICISM

Robin Gross, staff attorney for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the Church of Scientology was trying to use copyright law to stifle criticism.

"A lot of the cases using copyright to quell critics are Church of Scientology cases," she said.

******************

Scientology is a science fiction story from Hell.

+

Johnny Asia, Pope-About-Town The First Church of Common Sense http://www.angelfire.com/co/COMMONSENSE/wakeup.html

Elians' Story for Dummies http://www.angelfire.com/co/COMMONSENSE/elian.html

Who is Johnny Asia?

http://www.angelfire.com/co/COMMONSENSE/letter.html

Subject: Woah...
From: "Mad-Eye Moody" <a@a.com>
Organization: Your Company
Message-ID: <Xns91DA69E50ECAuiui8989@216.166.71.231>
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 18:27:42 GMT

After reading a story about COS this morning on The Drudge Report (in regards to a blocked web site on google), I became curious and decided to educate myself abit about the COS. Wow... what did I find. This organization seems to be the height of evil. So much so that it really scares me when I think about what they do to their own members that fall out of favor.

How can any self respecting individual fall for this load of crap? I think I know though... people are always looking for answers to their problems and the lure of finding someone or an organization that professes to know the answers is sometimes overwekming. These people need to realize that sometimes life's answers don't come so easily. More often than not you have to find out on your own.

The stories that I have read - people actually dying after becoming mentally screwed up after undergoing the mental mind-fuck from the COS is just simply appaling. The outright extortion of individuals that have taken place, many of whom have lost their life savings to these criminals..

Why hasen't the Justice Department of the U.S. taken a real long close look at these people? Why hasn't the COS been sued out of existance??

Another thing - what is up with those hollywood celebrities who follow this line of crazy shit? These people are in the public eye, and as such they are directly responsible for promoting this CULT. Anyone hearing about the COS from these people and becoming harmed phisically or financially should sue these celebrities outright and vigorously.

From: "Bat Child (Sue M.)" <batchild1@NOSPAM.cox.net>
Subject: Reuters, 3/22/2002: Google restores link to anti-Scientology site
Organization: Knights of Xemu
Message-ID: <hmpp9ukkc12e2bt9l31afavum545h1pakm@4ax.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 20:32:42 GMT

Found at:

http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2002/03/22/google.htm

====================

Google restores link to Scientology site

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) — Google restored a Web site critical of the Church of Scientology on its Internet search engine Thursday while free speech advocates slammed the company for removing the site in the first place.

Google said the company had only removed certain pages from the site because of a copyright dispute.

"Certain pages of the Xenu.net Web site were removed from our search engine earlier this week in response to a copyright infringement notification under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA),"

Google spokesman David Krane said in an e-mail.

The home page for Xenu.net was "inadvertently removed" along with a long, two-page list of associated Web pages Wednesday but was put back Thursday, said Google spokeswoman Cindy McCaffrey. Neither she nor Krane were available for further comment.

On Thursday evening, the Web site was listed fourth under Google search results for "Scientology" and 8th under "Church of Scientology."

A lawyer representing the Church of Scientology accused Xenu.net of "wholesale, verbatim copyright infringement" by allegedly reprinting large amounts of material on the site.

"We don't abuse this act," the lawyer, Helena Kobrin of the Los Angeles firm of Moxin & Kobrin said of the DMCA. "We go very strictly by what the copyright laws are."

Copyright law allows people to use pieces of copyrighted material for personal, education and other purposes under a so-called "fair use"

provision. However, Kobrin said the Web site used more than was allowed under fair use.

"We will do whatever we can to protect these copyrights," she said.

"The real story here is my clients are constantly the targets of some really horrendous stuff on the Internet."

The Church of Scientology, whose members include actors Tom Cruise and John Travolta, has mounted challenges to Web sites and organizations that are critical of it in the past.

Stifling criticism

Robin Gross, staff attorney for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the Church of Scientology was trying to use copyright law to stifle criticism.

"A lot of the cases using copyright to quell critics are Church of Scientology cases," she said.

The DMCA protects companies that host or link to Web sites from being held liable if they notify allegedly offending Web sites that there is a complaint about them and give them a chance to respond, Gross said.

Google had to remove Xenu.net immediately, as the company claimed in a letter to Andreas Heldal-Lund, the Norwegian Web master of the site, but could have replaced it after getting a counter-notice from Heldal-Lund, attorney Gross said.

"Had we not removed these URLs (uniform resource locators, or network address of Web pages), we would be subject to a claim for copyright infringement, regardless of its merit," Google said in its letter.

Don Marti, an activist who protested the arrest of a Russian programmer under the DMCA last year, said he and other activists met with Google on Thursday to discuss the situation.

"Google invited us right in," said Marti, whose ad hoc group is called "Mountain View, California, Xenu Independent Study Group."

Google had the Web site back up before the group arrived at its Mountain View offices on Thursday afternoon, he said.

"We're discussing Google's DMCA policy and trying to keep this from happening again," Marti said. "Google should be a fair and accurate representation of what's on the Internet."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright 2002 Reuters Limited. Click for Restrictions.

====================

http://members.cox.net/batchild1 http://members.cox.net/scorseseinfo

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Internet Magazine: Xenu.net
Date: 24 Mar 2002 13:09:48 GMT
Message-ID: <a7kj6s$f2f@netaxs.com>

Google caught out by copyright Internet Magazine 22 March 2002 http://www.internet-magazine.com/news/view.asp?id=2387

Google removed links to a Web site from its search database earlier this week after allegations of copyright infringement.

The search engine was forced to remove links to pages criticising the Church of Scientology. Members of the Church include Hollywood heavyweights Tom Cruise and John Travolta.

Google fell foul of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a US law passed in 1998.

The site to suffer was Xenu.net, a well-known critic of the Church of Scientology, based in Norway.

The Church felt that their copyright had been infringed because a disproportionate amount of their material had been printed on Xenu's site.

The usual practice under copyright law is to quote as much as is needed to illustrate a point. The problem with the DMCA is that it doesn't set out any minimum or maximum limits.

Under the Act, companies like Google that host or link to disputed sites can be held liable for the sites' content.

It seems that in its haste to remove links to the offending pages, Google removed the whole of the Xenu site from its database. Links have now been selectively reinstated.

Freedom of speech campaigners are worried that the DCMA is increasingly being used as a backdoor to stifle criticism and impose censorship.

The disputed pages could be reinstated if the allegations were challenged in the US courts. But the Norwegian hosts are reluctant to take this step and become subject to US law.

From: "Feisty" <sunny@skytoday.com>
Subject: www.morons.org - xenu.net
Message-ID: <_izn8.1514$oa.1018088@news20>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 00:19:18 -0600
Organization: Jump.Net

Found searching Yahoo! -

www.morons.org is chatting about Operation Clambake There's an article and then readers are pssting comments:

Article: Google's Excising of Operation Clambake a Result of the DMCA

Morons in the News: Google's Excising of Operation Clambake a Result of the DMCA

posted by spatula on Mar. 21, 2002 10 comments from readers [ post! ]

ScientologyT is now using the DMCA as leverage to hush criticism of their cult...

Yesterday, we reported that a number of xenu.net pages had disappeared from Google's cache, directory, and in some cases from the search engine altogether.

Now there's some new light on the subject from Xenu.net itself.

According to an email from Google to Xenu.net, the data was removed because the ScientologyT folks used the Digital Millenium Copyright Act alleging that xenu.net had violated their copyrights on the following goodies:

ScientologyT Photo Album A directory of stories written by the xenu.net staff A story about Scientology'sT negligent homicide of Lisa McPherson in particular The entire contents of a xenu.net media kit, largely comprised of their own original material Public documents regarding ScientologyT being kicked out of Greece The entire contents of a xenu.net leaflet ...among other things.

Whether ScientologyT actually owns the copyright on many of the documents or parts of documents they claim to own on the xenu.net site is highly questionable. In all liklihood, this is just another in a long series of ploys used by the cult to hush up those critical of them.

---Nick

Comments from readers:

Posted by George_W_Bush_Shot_My_Cat ® on 2002-03-22 00:14:54 UTC from Blackpool, England:

Fucking hell.This is the man reaosn why I think very litle of digital copyright acts - They're fucking stupid.

(snip some other interesting comments)

===

Feisty

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Northernstar: Xenu.net
Date: 25 Mar 2002 12:57:38 GMT
Message-ID: <a7n6s2$spr@netaxs.com>

Our Opinion Scientology shoots its messenger Northernstar (Northern Illinois University) Monday, March 25, 2002 http://www.star.niu.edu/forum/articles/032502-our.asp

To mention "Scientology" is to tread lightly, ever aware that one false step leads not to an argument but time-consuming litigation.

However, the sensitive and oft-questioned religion, founded by L. Ron Hubbard, has, in the course of attacking a beloved search engine, exposed an area on which to tread even more lightly Ð the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Last week, the Church of Scientology asked the operators of Google to shut down one of the gateways opened when the word "Scientology" is typed into the search engine. The Church claimed xenu.net, an anti-Scientology Web site, violated the guidelines set by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

The act (with information conveniently gathered through the Google search engine) was put into law in 1998 as an attempt to update copyright laws still looking at a pre-Internet world. While the act looks at such topics as online service provider liability, the more contentious wording still hasn't found its way into the courts.

Thus, when the very busy lawyers for the Church of Scientology threatened Google, it took some time to figure out if the Church even had a case.

Within a few days, the answer was a resounding "no."

You see, Scientology's lawyers weren't going after quotations from books or other copywritten material. Instead, the complaint claimed metatags (the beacons on each page that search engines look for) like "Scientology"

and "Hubbard" were violating the Church's copyrights.

But there's a problem: Those words are trademarks, and those aren't covered in the wide expanse of the act. Soon, the site was back to its prominent position within the search for "Scientology."

This idea is not dead, and to think otherwise is to say the Church of Scientology welcomes detractors. But for the sake of some semblance of order within the Internet's broad scope and for a clean path on the road of free speech, metatags should be granted a wide berth under any future revisions of the act.

There are few places left that offer such easy portals for information, both pro and con, than search engines. To limit this ability in any way would be a tremendous blow to a nation's confidence that the Internet can offer a voice for just about anyone.

Without search engines the pages on the far reaches of the Web will lay dormant, flying in the face of all the most grand Internet ideals. And if those individual pages require litigation, then prosecute individual page owners before shooting legal briefs at the messenger.

From: "FACTNet International" <manage@factnet.org>
Subject: Feels like an icepick in the forehead.....
Organization: FACTNet International
Message-ID: <_aRn8.16153$To6.5319906@e420r-atl1.usenetserver.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 19:40:04 -0800

Updated Google/Scientology list of links.

Remember to give them all a click before bedtime. (Some of these sites are interactive. Leave a comment. Give 'em sumthin' to think about.)

The current Scientology scandal regarding GOOGLE is being covered by these News websites:

http://overlawyered.com/ http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2002/03/22/rtr549273.html http://www.usethesource.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?sid=02/03/24/1745222 http://www.at-web.de/google/operation_clambake.htm http://napps.nwfusion.com/compendium/archives/00000008.html http://rollberg.antville.org/topics/Zensur/26729/ http://www.rp-online.de/news/multimedia/online/2002-0322/sekte.html http://www.suchfibel.de/news/ScientologyerzwingtSeite.htm http://megarad.com/article.php?sid=625 http://www.fnl.nl/news/shownews.php3?TickerID=2002.03.21-bho-000 http://www.lisnews.com/gcommentSubmit.php3?sid=20020322111203&pid=0 http://lists.infoanarchy.org/pipermail/p2pj/2002-March/000606.html http://davenet.userland.com/2002/03/21/scientologyAndGoogle http://www.msnbc.com/news/728041.asp?0si=- http://www.symlink.ch/articles/02/03/21/1422209.shtml http://www.quicktopic.com/13/H/X7PBh2nZVWBhb http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/24533.html http://www.linuxsecurity.com/articles/government_article-4659.html http://www.techfocus.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=3 83&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0 http://www.poynter.org/tidbits/ http://www.winterspeak.com/2002_03_01_archive.html#75029769 http://www.paradox1x.org/archives/00000397.shtml http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/16938.html http://ain.com.ua/web/2002/03/22/1029.html http://neworder.box.sk/smsread.php?newsid=3686 http://www.star.niu.edu/forum/articles/032502-our.asp http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?30REQEVENT=&REQAUTH=21046&14001REQSUB =REQINT1=52212 http://www.internet-magazine.com/news/view.asp?id=2387 http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/175421.html http://www.webwereld.nl/nieuws/10695.phtml http://www.microcontentnews.com/articles/googlechurch.htm http://www.techfocus.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=3 77 http://news.lycos.com/news/story.asp?section=Politics&storyId=361627&topic=c lambake http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/business/technology/291019 5.htm http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2002/03/22/google.htm http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/020322/n22206750_1.html http://www.cosmiverse.com/tech03220202.html http://forum.fuckedcompany.com/phpcomments/index.php?newsid=84606&sid=1&page =1&parentid=0&crapfilter=1 http://cbc.ca/stories/2002/03/22/xenugoogle020322 http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/opinion/story/0,24330,3377400,00.html http://www.morons.org/articles/7/1472 http://www.metafilter.com/comments.mefi/15684 http://geek.com/news/geeknews/2002mar/gee20020322010860.htm http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/internet/03/22/google.reut/index.html http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020322/wr_nm/tech_google _dc_2 http://reuters.com/news_article.jhtml;jsessionid=WRKEFR0K1SCWGCRBAEOCFEYKEEA RKIWD?type=internetnews&StoryID=730033 http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/business/technology/2910195.htm http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-866058.html http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,51233,00.html http://news.com.com/2100-1023-865936.html http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/3/20/8222/92911 http://slashdot.org/yro/02/03/21/0453200.shtml?tid=99 http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=scientology http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=154205&group=webcast http://www.operatingthetan.com/google/ http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jo-21.03.02-001/

The origins of Scientology's efforts to censor the Internet is discussed in these pages:

http://www.operatingthetan.com/google/ http://www.xtdnet.nl/paul/PrioriyTelecom-Xenu.html http://www2.thecia.net/users/rnewman/scientology/home.html http://www.xs4all.nl/~felipe/cos/ http://www.cyberlaw.com/cylw0495.html http://www.rickross.com/reference/Scien30.html http://www.skeptic.com/03.3.jl-jj-scientology.html http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/CoS/ http://www.watchman.org/sci/c0$p1.htm http://atheism.about.com/cs/scientologyvsth/ http://cisar.org/010319b.htm http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/1999/06/07/editorial1.html http://www.factnet.org/briefing.htm

IOHO FACTNet Staff

-- F.A.C.T.Net, Inc.

PO Box 3135 Boulder, CO 80307-3135 USA

* Web site http://www.factnet.org/ * E-mail mailto:factnet@factnet.org * Donations http://www.factnet.org/donation.htm * Donations by PayPal. Account = manage@factnet.org * Subscriptions to Newsletters http://www.factnet.org/Subscribe.html

F.A.C.T.Net is a non-profit 501(c)(3) news source, referral service, and archive protecting freedom of mind from harms caused by psychological coercion.

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Daily Yomiuri: DMCA and Xenu.net
Date: 26 Mar 2002 16:42:34 GMT
Message-ID: <a7q8dq$aqv@netaxs.com>

Recent results of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act Daily Yomiuri On-Line March 26, 2002 by John Jerney Special to The Daily Yomiuri http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20020326wo62.htm

I predicted some time ago that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) would change the basic nature of how we publish information, how we consume it, and how we interact with products and services with a significant perceived intellectual property (IP) component.

I have also expressed the opinion that our understanding and basic assumption of free speech could be adversely affected by overly restricted laws protecting IP. Recent developments of the use of the DMCA seem to bear this out, and point further to potential setbacks in personal liberties.

Silicon Valley is all about IP. And so it is for all knowledge or content-based enterprises. The CDs, DVDs, tapes, and even the raw hardware are of little value in themselves, often costing only pennies per unit to manufacture.

Instead, the value resides in the research and development effort that goes into the product.

For a long time, consumers of IP have had an understanding and agreement with producers as to the limits of what we could do with the intellectual property that comes bundled into the products that we buy.

However, as I have pointed out in previous columns, the DMCA has changed many of these basic rules here in the United States, as well as in several other countries that have either rushed, or have been influenced, to pass similar laws.

This is because the DMCA not only prohibits the violation of digital (and other copyright), but also forbids the circumvention of any technical measure used to protect copyright.

Here are some examples of recent developments related to the DMCA.

Wired News recently reported that the Church of Scientology has used the DMCA to convince the popular Internet search engine Google to manipulate search results so as not to point to Web sites that supposedly reveal church secrets.

The chief offender appears to be a Web site called Xenu.net, which runs "Operation Clambake," a self-described fight against the church on the Net.

The Church of Scientology claims copyright infringement on certain material on Xenu.net, and the reason Google is involved is that under the DMCA, service providers are not even allowed to provide a link to sites that have been accused of infringing on copyright.

Interestingly, the name for Xenu.net comes from Scientology itself.

Xenu.net claims that Scientologists believe that Xenu was a galactic ruler who brought life to Earth, then called Teegeeack, in a rather complicated series of events.

Whether this is an accurate summary of aspects of the church's belief is unclear. However, the simple threat of the use of the DCMA has become a rather convenient tool to suppress some element of criticism on the Web, and hence some feel, to limit free speech itself.

The DCMA gained even more notoriety among free speech and Web advocates last year when Russian programmer Dmitri Sklyarov was arrested for authoring a program that enabled users to circumvent the protection in Adobe e-books.

The DMCA makes it illegal to not only create programs that can bypass encryption or other digital rights management system, but also makes it illegal to describe how to create such a system.

The case, now in U.S. District Court, has taken an interesting twist as the employer of Sklyarov, the Russian software company Elcomsoft, is claiming that since the software is not physically being made available in the United States, the DMCA cannot be made to apply.

In effect, Judge Ronald Whyte will have to decide whether the DMCA, a U.S.

law, can be applied against a company operating in another country and making its products available through the Internet.

The case is not clear cut, however, as it appears that Elcomsoft also has a server physically located in Chicago. If this proves to be correct, the application of the DMCA could appear to be consistent with the intent of Congress when it passed the law.

Still, it seems fair to assume that someone will try to apply the DMCA in an extraterritorial fashion at some point. After all, the entire notion of intellectual property is that it cannot be tied down to any particular location.

The government may not have figured out how to apply the DMCA to the mostly borderless world of the Internet, but it has applied the law at its own border.

Officials with the U.S. Custom Service have reportedly confiscated shipments of hardware products that enable people to circumvent copy protection systems built into advanced game consoles such as PlayStation and others.

In particular, the agency has been stopping the import of NEO4 chips, commonly referred to as "mod chips," that enable CD copies of PlayStation games to play on the popular consoles.

Under normal circumstances, a PlayStation will not run from a CD that is a copy of the original. However, using a small mod chip, you can fool PlayStation into not caring.

The U.S. Custom Service has been using the DMCA to prevent the import of these chips, instead of applying the more traditional notion of having law enforcement stop the piracy of games themselves.

This subtle turn of policy makes a whole range of so-called "fair use activities" impossible, including preventing a legitimate customer from making a backup copy of a game for strictly personal use (without the mod chip, the copy will not play when the original is damaged).

This would be akin to banning VCRs because the device itself is capable of being used illegally, not because it is being used in an illegal fashion.

And these three cases are just the beginning. The DMCA is quickly showing itself to be everything its critics have been warning us about.

Intellectual property deserves protection, but if this includes infringing on cherished rights including free speech and fair use, one has to ask, at what cost?

Jerney is president of Volksware, Inc., a Silicon Valley-based publishing, consulting and professional services firm specializing in e-commerce, mobile computing, the Internet and Web publishing. If you have any comments, suggestions or questions about Silicon Valley, please send them along to jerney@volksware.com.

From: ebner59@aol.com (Ebner59)
Date: 26 Mar 2002 18:32:23 GMT
Subject: Harper's
Message-ID: <20020326133223.02291.00000389@mb-fc.aol.com>

HARPER'S WEEKLY March 26, 2002 WEEKLY REVIEW

At the behest of lawyers representing the Church of Scientology, the Internet search engine Google removed links to dozens of anti-Scientology websites.

Subject: The Google Ad Controversy: Google v Cult (Round III)
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 22:29:13 -0600
From: Don NOTs <wkohler@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <260320022229130837%wkohler@gmx.de>
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Mail-Copies-To: nobody X-Face: >l?$J|79RD/?K$YNc1MvnqG5a5)=Z:FI^;IcYrt8G^QJL2d\*Ss,)PNFJnc)C *ay4R$Rz5#w:ey^cy~qW#&I6K'\/'eJ;,,vVI_&pP?m-+*;Te!N|~QHh7Ur3{1^x^w3I _oj}6xArN1!u0eq0A-X:]BqS/_T>$}Of7SbXE)(EoRH_i;FoNsQVv}#AhT=U['9cpXZ>

h5cDTi`Ijb9(YC[rl/@R>hCx.z*Y*?;G(>%0fN%Ctm+&L*>?;v.'`paZ12"8a=s<ATK

An exceptionally well-written piece can be found at:

http://microcontentnews.com/articles/googleround3.htm

Tuesday, March 26, 2002

Google versus Church, round 3 Scientology critics again claim Google censorship, this time through Adwords program

by John Hiler

See related stories:

Church v Google - How the Church of Scientology is forcing Google to censor its critics

Church v Google, round 2 - An Update on the latest Google and Scientology developments

GOOGLE CHARGED WITH EXTENDING CENSORSHIP TO ADVERTISING PROGRAM

Sources tell Microcontent News that Google is now rejecting anti-Scientology ads from its Google Adwords program, claiming the right to "exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site."

This is the latest in a series of controversies involving Google, Scientologists, and accusations of censorship.

THE FIRST GOOGLE/SCIENTOLOGY CONTROVERSY

Last week, Google removed Scientology critic Xenu.net from its search engine database, after Scientologists lawyers filed a DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) complaint to Google. The move was met with outrage by the Internet community, generating a flurry of press from mass media outlets.

A day later, Google added the Xenu.net frontpage back to its database, as evidence emerged that the frontpage was not in violation of DMCA regulations. Further analysis of the Scientology document revealed that the trademark violations in the complaint were actually outside the purview of DMCA regulations.

As a result, Google was able to legally restore the Xenu.net frontpage and placate the Internet community.

Google continues to exclude the rest of the Xenu.net website, pending resolution of the current DMCA complaint. An official statement from Google says that "webmasters [have] the ability to have their content reinstated if they submit a counter notification to Google."

According to Andreas Heldal-Lund, Xenu.net's webmaster, this counter-notification submission would be costly and would subject the site to US jurisdiction. As a result, Xenu recently announced in a Reuters interview that it does not intend to submit a counter notification to Google.

In a related development, Scientology critics are claiming that the Church of Scientology has successfully lobbied to remove Xenu from the Yahoo directory. If true, this marks an expansion of the Scientologists history of using intellectual property to achieve de facto censorship.

GOOGLE ADWORDS

Google Adwords are a self-service advertising campaign that allows small business and individuals to place small text-based ads on Google's search results page. The Adwords program has been hugely successful, giving Google's advertisers the ability to target ads with a high degree of precision for as little as a penny an ad. The enormous success of the program has helped Google reach profitability early in 2001.

GOOGLE ADWORDS DURING THE FIRST CONTROVERSY

During the first Google/Scientology controversy, users searching for the word "Scientology" were unable to find any sites critical of Scientology on the first page of search results. Privacy advocates turned to Google's Adword program as a workaround, as several techies and privacy advocates bought ads pointing to Xenu.net.

Many within the Internet community hailed the Adwords program as a stop gap measure against the alleged censorship forced upon Google by the DMCA.

GOOGLE REJECTS ADWORDS CRITICAL OF SCIENTOLOGY

Sometime last weekend, that measure was shut down as well, as Google began rejecting ads critical of Scientology.

A Microcontent News reader first noticed the issue on Saturday, when he placed an ad pointing to Xenu.net:

Headline: Loved Battlefield Earth?

Line one: The faith's as good as the movie!

Line two: Learn their scifi secrets--save $$$ Home Page URL: www.xenu.net Link to URL: http://www.xenu.net

After the ad was quickly "disapproved" by Google, he began to test the limits of what was allowed. He placed another Adword in Google, this one pointing to a book on Amazon: A Piece of Blue Sky : Scientology, Dianetics and L. Ron Hubbard Exposed, by Jon Atack.

Headline: Study world religions Line one: Learn about many faiths Line two: before you join one.

Home Page URL: www.dmuuc.org Link to URL: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/081840499X/

According to Amazon, the author "exposes Hubbard's bizarre imagination and behavior, tracing the creation of Scientology in the years following World War II to perhaps its final schism following Hubbard's death in 1986."

This ad was also quickly cancelled, prompting him to send an email to Google for clarification.

Google's response came earlier today:

Anti-scientology ads are disapproved per our policy of no ads that advertise "sites that advocate against any individual, group, or organization." All of your ads link to the same set of sites which are anti-scientologist in purpose.

We are not being overly strict with the anti-scientologists. We disapprove ads linking to sites that advocate against any individual, organization, or group. These ads do not adhere to the larger purpose of AdWords -- to advertise businesses, services, and products. Google Groups is the proper venue for opinionated dialogue for these types of issues.

Google went on to explain that their policy has been a consistent one, and doesn't reflect the recent controversy with Scientologists:

As we have not made exceptions for any other anti- group, we cannot make an exception for the anti-scientologists. Please note that we will discontinue all of your ads if you continue to run these types of ads.

Please know that this policy is under no pressure from the Scientology group. This is a long standing policy that we will continue to enforce.

I understand how sensitive this issue is right now. Please know anti-scientology sites will continue to appear in our search results, and you may use Google Groups to start an effective discourse of your opinions.

Further inflaming the issue is the fact that pro-scientology ads continue to run on Google. In the multiple Scientology-related Adword campaigns analyzed by Microcontent News, only anti-Scientology ads seem to have been rejected.

AMBIGUOUS ADWORD POLICIES

This has upset many Scientology critics, as Scientologists continue to extend their control over which websites Google users see when they search for Scientology-related keywords.

One issue that's particularly controversial for the critics is the ambiguity around the Google Adword policy itself. One user wrote Google in an attempt to clarify the policy:

Sponsored Links Girls Talk About Abortion Young women who've had or wanted an abortion tell their stories.

www.standupgirl.com Interest:

Please tell me why my mild[ly]-worded ad is so reprehensible whereas the 'standupgirl.com' anti-abortion site running at http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&q=abortion is somehow ok?

Google quickly responded to the question through email:

We have reviewed the ad running on abortion that you noted, and it appears to be a site offering information regarding girls struggling with the choices of pregnancy.

It's not immediately clear to Microcontent News how the anti-abortion ad is substantially different than an anti-Scientology ad.

Without a clear guideline or policy, these sorts of distinctions are difficult to make with any degree of consistency. That begs the question: Is Google more likely to allow an Adword campaign that supports a cause than a campaign that criticizes it?

That doesn't sit well with Scientology critics. "What if someone wrote a biography on Winston Churchill where they criticized him?" asks one of the rejected Adword buyers. "Could I advertise that book on Google? What on earth is not critical of something at some point?"

SCIENTOLOGISTS CONTINUE TO BUY ADWORDS

Throughout the entire controversy, Scientology has continued to be an active buyer of Google Adwords. Google users searching for the phrase "Scientology" see the following ad, pointing to an officially sanctioned site:

Scientology Services Helping individuals to handle the effects of drugs.

www.drugfreelife.net/

Users searching for L. Ron Hubbard - Scientology's founder - see a similar ad:

Who is L. Ron Hubbard?

Founder of Scientology & Dianetics writes about drug rehabilitation.

drugrehab.lronhubbard.org

This aggressive buying of advertising by Scientologists has been a common practice of the Church.

USING ADS TO ACHIEVE CENSORSHIP

We've documented in past articles how Scientologists have aggressively applied copyright and trademark law to silence critics.

This latest Google controversy highlights two other tools that Scientologists have used to achieve a similar effect:

Anti hate-crime laws Heavy advertising budgets THE CASE OF THE PINELLAS COUNTY BUS ADS

In December of 1998, Scientology critics bought ads on the side of buses running in Florida's Pinellas County.

The St. Petersburg Times reported on the story shortly after:

Eleven messages about Scientology were featured on 10 buses in Clearwater that weekend. They included "Think for Yourself. Quit Scientology" and "Why does Scientology lie to its members?"

Church officials and their lawyers complained so forcefully that Roger Sweeney, director of the Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority, pulled all 10 buses off the road that Saturday with two days left on the critics' contract.

The law cited by Scientologist lawyers was a state law meant to apply to hate-crimes:

The law prohibits anonymous hate messages against religious groups. The anti-Scientology group had failed to puts its name and address on the ads.

The Scientologists followed up their legal threat with a hefty advertising budget:

[S]hortly after the anti-Scientology ads appeared in December, the church moved to shut out any repeat ads when it inquired about buying all of the transit agency's ads for the next two months at a cost of about $70,000.

The transit authority turned down the money, and voted to allow only ads that "propose a commercial transaction". "Political or public issue messages" - such as those run every year by the local Salvation Army and the United Way - were banned from running in future bus advertisements.

LEGAL ISSUES

Like Google, the bus company is under no legal obligation to protect the First Amendment rights of advertisers. Legally, both cases are purely one of a business minimizing legal exposure, by taking action to ensure that advertisements don't slander and harass individuals, groups, or organizations.

There's been no evidence so far of a Scientology complaint or pressure in this latest Google/Scientology incident. That said, the continued ads pointing only to officially-sanctioned Scientology sites makes it appear like the Church has been able to replicate its strategy of buying ads to silence critics.

GOOGLE, SCIENTOLOGY, AND CENSORSHIP

Google is once again on a slippery slope involving censorship of Scientology critics.

Continuing to allow non-commercial ads on Google Adwords will force the search engine to monitor ads piece-by-piece, and place the company in constant danger of being charged with censorship.

One alternative may be to follow the example of the Pinellas County Transit Authority, and only allow ads that "propose a commercial transaction". This would significantly cut down on the revenue potential of Google Adwords, and move Google's revenue model much closer to that of its chief competitor, Overture.

Google seems to be currently pursuing a second option: according to Fred von Lohmann, a Senior Attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, "It is well within Google's rights to only sell ads that don't generate lawsuits."

A third option - standing up to the Scientologists - is most probably legally defensible, according to von Lohmann. "As long as the anti-Scientology ads don't defame, lie, contain hate speech, or unfairly compete, Google should be off the hook legally."

But that may not be realistic, according to von Lohmann. "Google's behavior so far suggests a real unwillingness to get sued. In doing so, they're not acting any differently from any other commercial concern."

Date: 29 Mar 2002 06:59:47 -0000
Message-ID: <28QY5LXJ37344.3331828704@frog.gilgamesh.org>
From: CL <cl@canyonlycanthrope.moon>
Subject: CST responsible for DMCA attack on Google and Operation Clambake
Comments: This message probably did not originate from the above address.

It was automatically remailed by one or more anonymous mail services.

You should NEVER trust ANY address on Usenet ANYWAYS: use PGP !!!

Get information about complaints from the URL below X-Remailer-Contact: http://www.privacyresources.org/frogadmin/

The legal assault on Google and Operation Clambake for alleged "copyright violations" was the work of the owner of those copyrights:

the "Church of Spiritual Technology" (CST), doing business under the fictitious business name of the "L. Ron Hubbard Library."

CST is not a church. CST is a 501(c)(3) corporation that was granted tax exemption by the IRS and, as a result of that tax exemption, received ownership and control of all Scientology-related intellectual property, including ownership of all copyrights, and controlling interest in all the trademarks--even those titularly "held" by the so-called "Religious Technology Center" (RTC). RTC is, in fact, a front for CST--its yard dog, contractually bound to defend the intellectual property owned by CST through any and all "legal" means (and I use the word advisedly).

That's why an attorney claiming to "represent RTC" is the visible and apparent culprit, when, in fact, CST is behind the entire operation.

By virtue of its ownership and control over all Scientology-related intellectual property, CST is the senior-most corporation in Scientology, and has the ability to leverage any junior corporation in any way they see fit, since all junior organizations rely entirely on the intellectual property--copyrights and trademarks--owned and controlled by CST.

CST is run by three tax, copyright, and probate attorneys who are "Special Directors" of the corporation: Sherman Lenske, Stephen Lenske, and Lawrence E. Heller. None of them are Scientologists.

As "Special Directors," the three attorneys named above have virtual, if not complete, carte blanche power over CST and, by extension, over the entire corporate structure known loosely (and inaccurately) as "Scientology." Their powers are spelled out in the Bylaws of CST (which are available on the web, as listed at the bottom of this message), and derive largely from the IRS code, since one of their primary stated purposes is to maintain tax exemption for CST at all cost.

One of the co-founders of CST, tax attorney Meade Emory, was Legislation Counsel for the Joint Committee on Taxation of the U.S. Congress from 1970 to 1972, and is a former Assistant to the Commissioner of IRS, having served in that capacity under IRS Commissioner Donald C.

Alexander from 1973 to 1975.

All the above statements of incontrovertible fact are copiously documented on the internet at several web sites, and have been further documented in a.r.s., which documentation can be found in Google's archives.

A press release that first broke the story of a former IRS official being involved in the establishment of CST is here:

http://www.geocities.com/thearscclibrarian/prfpressrelease.html

The following web sites contain much of the documentation:

http://www.clever.net/webwerks/veritas/index.htm http://www.geocities.com/thearscclibrarian/

Copies of many of the most important legal documents, including the Bylaws of CST, detailing and proving the statements of incontrovertible fact above can be found at:

http://www.geocities.com/thearscclibrarian/cstlegalpaperscontents.html

CL

Go Back