Scientology --- LA Business Journal: Scientology wields DMCA against Google

LA Business Journal: Scientology wields DMCA against Google

Los Angeles Business Journal April 1, 2002 (issue)

ENGINEERING SEARCHES & CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY Christopher Keough, Staff Reporter**

The Church of Scientology, wielding the federal Digital Millennium Copyright Act, has convinced search engine Google, Inc. to limit access to certain links that are critical of the organization.

The Church of Scientology objected to highly-placed search links to Xenu.net, a Norway-based site that claims to lead the "fight against the Church of Scientology on the Net."

Linda Kobrin (sic), an attorney with Moxin & Kobrin who represents the church, said the offending Web pages violate copyright laws, regardless of whether they are critical of the church.

Robin Gross, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who specializes in intellectual property law, said the flap started when the Church of Scientology used technical means to lower Xenu.net rankings on Google, which are based on the number of links in response to a search query. According to Gross, Google got wise to the manipulation and righted the situation, only to be met with the DMCA complaint.

A Google spokesman would not comment other than to say that Google was in direct communications with the webmaster of Xenu.net because of copyright infringement notification under the DMCA. Google, which allows webmasters to re-post content if they provide a counter-notification, has re-posted the site's home page.

Xenu.net officials did not reply to e-mail seeking comment.

Gross, who is not directly involved in the dispute, said the church has developed a track record in claiming copyright infringement - and having those claims upheld in lower courts. "It depends on how much backbone Google has in this cae," Gross said. "Are they willing to defend free speech and stand up for their customers?"

______________________________________________________________________________

Staff reporter Christopher Keough can be reached at (323) 549-5225, ext. 235, or at ckeough@labusinessjournal.com _______________________________________________________________________________

** Does anyone know if Christopher is related to Scienofuck Danny Keough, ex-husband of Lisa Marie Presley?

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Boston Herald: Google and Xenu.net
Date: 3 Apr 2002 13:17:10 GMT
Message-ID: <a8evcm$nnt@netaxs.com>

Net freedoms should be used wisely Boston Herald Net Life/by Stephanie Schorow Tuesday, April 2, 2002 http://www2.bostonherald.com/lifestyle/lifestyle_trends/netl04022002.htm

It's been a troubling few weeks for freedom on the electronic frontier.

According to Wired magazine, Cuba has quietly banned the sale of computers and computer accessories to private citizens.

The island nation already restricts Web access via government-run servers;

Fidel apparently wants to minimize any chance that Cubans - even those who could afford a computer - could access "subversive" material.

Pundit A.J. Liebling once quipped that freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who owned one. Today, a free Net means nothing to those who can't access it.

In this country, we may not worry as much about outright censorship, but other tricky maneuvers can have the same affect.

Take the recent posturing by the Church of Scientology, which threatened the popular Google search engine with legal action if searches on the word "Scientology" yielded links to anti-Scientology sites like www.xenu.net.

The church contends that under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, this infringes on the church's intellectual property. Google yanked the links at first, but apparently restored them after the move outraged many Net citizens.

Note that, in this case, the church didn't go after the sites themselves;

instead officials tried to prevent Web users from stumbling across them.

As of now, however, a search on "Scientology" calls up xenu.net as the fourth choice; the top three are official Scientology sites, including www.scientology.org. For more on this issue, check out http://slashdot.org and www.kuro5hin.org.

Another Liebling update: Freedom of the Net belongs to those who score high on search engines.

Closer to home, the curious custom of cybersquatting got a new twist when a Wakefield-based Web developer launched a call for the resignation of Providence Mayor Vincent "Buddy" Cianci by setting up www.buddycianci.com.

The site, sponsored by Rhode Island Citizens for Ethical Government, features an essay contest for students on topics like "How Buddy Cianci Can Be Lawfully Removed from Office" and "Smallest State, Biggest Ego." It also has a discussion board and links to news reports on Cianci, who faces federal corruption charges.

All good, clean fun in the name of citizen activism - except for one thing: The site's name. Naturally, His Honor is furious that his own name was used to attack him. Indeed, a Google search on "buddy cianci" puts www.buddycianci.com in third place. Histrionics aside, this should give us pause.

This sort of Net dirty tricking isn't new. In the 1996 presidential campaign, satirists snapped up www.bobdole.com; belatedly, the senator and presidential candidate set up his official site at www.bobdole.org. In the last campaign, the wickedly funny anti-George W. Bush site, www.gwbush.com, drew a rebuke from the man himself about "the limits of freedom." (Bush's official site remains www.georgewbush.com)

The First Amendment should protect critical or satirical Web sites that incorporate the name of their targets, like www.Microsoftsucks.com.

But what seemed fun in the early days of the Internet ("Dudes, we grabbed BobDole.com before he did!!!") is a more serious matter today.

Increasingly candidates, celebrities and, for that matter, ordinary citizens are launching their own Web sites. They have a right to do so using their own names.

I'm not defending Cianci's controversial approach to city government. But I would feel better about Internet freedom if the creator of www.buddycianci.com would relaunch under something like BuddyMustGo, Ciancisucks or even RetireBuddy'sRug.

Cianci hasn't helped matters. He promptly grabbed Web rights to the names of various media figures and critics (such as CharlesBakst.com) - just to prove, he said, "how it easy it is to take someone's name." Perhaps, Mr.

Cianci should have registered www.buddycianci.org, buddycianci.net and buddycianci.biz, which were available as of last week.

Alas, www.dirtytricks.com is already taken; but dirtiertricks.com is available.

Freedom of the Net still belongs to those who get there first.

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: Financial Times: Google and Xenu.net
Date: 3 Apr 2002 13:19:42 GMT
Message-ID: <a8evhe$nnt@netaxs.com>

The wireless push Financial Times April 2, 2002 by James Hein http://hoovnews.hoovers.com/fp.asp?layout=displaynews&doc_id=NR20020403670.2_49f1003962bc41e4

So there I was as the communications fair at the Queen Sirikit center looking at the new mobile phones and the promises for the future. The question still remains, however: When is Thailand going to stop dancing around the edges of the technology pool and jump in?

Wireless connections, Bluetooth, MMC, EMC and other technologies adopted in other parts of the world are currently just news and poster material here. It can change but that would require an effort by the current government to pass a few laws opening up the technology and communications bottlenecks that currently exist.

I did see some useful technology presented by GSM Advance. It demonstrated a system where you could control the lights in your house while on holiday using your mobile phone. Another display showed how to connect your PDA to a projector and then receive the presentation from your secretary through your mobile.

More interesting to me were the units that combine both the PDA and the mobile. Some of these were rather clunky affairs from companies like Compaq that used a regular iPaq with a plug on cradle containing a mobile.

These reminded me of those old clunky Motorola phones affectionately know as bricks.

The Handspring units were sleeker with a better plug in technology but did not include the GPRS functionality, so communication is slower. The Handspring line has just been released here in Thailand to compete with their cousins from Palm.

There were some new units that integrated both technologies and these are the ones I will be watching over the next few months. The prices ranged from around 30,000 baht for the non-GPRS units up to around the 40,000 baht for those with GPRS support.

As usual, the computer offerings were better value for money. I saw a notebook with a 1 GHz CPU for as low as 25,000 baht and the sweet point for a good computer was under 40,000 baht. The top of the line units started at around 70,000 baht, which is down from the 85,000 mark a year ago.

A recent study in Britan from the people at the Transport Research Laboratory in Berkshire found that driving while using a mobile phone is more dangerous than drink driving. Reaction times are as much as 50 percent slower while using the mobile _ something many of us can confirm following people using a mobile phone here in Bangkok.

It is way past time for an enforced law forbidding the use of mobile phones while driving here in Thailand. Given that the highest cause of death here is due to driving accidents only adds to the urgency.

On another downside for technology, I ran into a problem with my HP laser printer. Shipping it back from Australia, I realised that the power cable was missing so I bought a regular power cord that would have of worked in 99 percent of all models. My printer, however, has a duplexing unit and HP carefully designed the location of the power port so that you need a special cord.

One of the things about technology and Thailand that I have noticed over the years is the almost complete lack of accessories and replacements that are anything outside of the mainstream. Try finding replacement erasers for your Rotring pencil, for example. After checking at the usual locations, I was left with the only solution _ modify a regular power cord.

Now this kind of solution is potentially dangerous but unless you want the hassle of ordering one from HP, this is the only solution. I know that HP is an engineering company and that they make excellent products, but I am sick and tired of "proprietary" solutions that cost their customers time and money.

According to my sources it is official: the Microsoft X-Box will not be coming to Thailand. In fact, apart from Japan it will not be coming to Asia in general. I am sure this is good news to Sony and other game box manufacturers and only highlights the idiocy of a company like Microsoft.

I have walked around the usual locations and watched as people from abroad ask for games for their game machines and the X-Box will be no exception.

Underground or grey market versions will arrive, driving the pirate game software market and all of the reasons not to release the X-Box will come to pass anyway.

The marketing reason behind the decision is fairly easy to understand, however. M$ is taking a hit on the cost of the hardware with the view to recovering costs and make money on the software sales. In a country like Thailand and others like Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong and especially China, software is essentially free for the game user and gives no profit to Microsoft.

In related news, there is a rumour that Microsoft is designing the X-Box 2 based on the AMD processor. Intel will not want this to be true, I am sure.

I saw a picture of an interesting backup power supply for my Nokia. It used a 9-Volt battery and simply plugged into the external power supply port. If any one has seen one of these for sale here in Thailand, please drop me an email.

INDUSTRY NEWS

The latest virus to make its way around the world is CARIC-A, aka the Bill Clinton virus. It is a worm that arrives in an email with the subject "Bill Caricature" and the attachment cari.scr. If you are silly enough to run the program, a picture of Bill Clinton will appear playing a saxophone from which a bra emerges. At the same time the virus will forward itself to everyone in your address book. If executed between 8 and 9 am, it will also delete all files in your root directory with the extension .SYS, .VXD, .OCX and .NLS. As usual, Mac and Linux users are immune.

The standards body IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers) has approved the standard 802.15.1 for the wireless personal area network.

It is fully compatible with the Bluetooth 1.1 standard promoted by an industry group. In short, everyone now supports Bluetooth, but I wonder when we will see it here in Thailand?

Apple is releasing a new 10GB iPod MP3 player soon, but this is still 10GB smaller than my Archos model. The price will be around $499 or $150 more than I paid for the Archos as well. The moral here is shopping around and buying a lesser known brand can save you a lot of money. Apple is also planning a 23-inch flat screen and it will be interesting to see how the price compares to that of the IBM 22-inch version.

Finally this week, apart from charging for Internet surfing there is a nasty trend developing out there as far as what links you can include on your web pages. The large search engine Google recently removed a web site from the World Wide Web that was critical of the Church of Scientology.

We can thank the US for this. Their draconian Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is effectively being imposed on the whole planet and slowing eroding the premise that the WWW is a free global resource. Ironically the DMCA is also attacking what is supposedly one of the US's fundamental freedoms _ free speech and freedom of expression.

- Email: jamesh@inet.co.th

From: "FACTNet International" <manage@factnet.org>
Subject: Dark Days Indeed...
Organization: FACTNet International
Message-ID: <zXPr8.37381$To6.9942731@e420r-atl1.usenetserver.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 21:30:37 -0800

Legal Protection Turns Service Providers Into Speech Police Saturday, April 06, 2002

NEW YORK - A 1998 federal law meant to combat digital piracy is increasingly being used to challenge free speech online as well.

In one recent case, the search engine Google removed links to a Norwegian site that criticizes the Church of Scientology International after the organization complained of copyright violations.

Free-speech advocates worry that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act effectively gives powerful copyright holders the ability to push parodies, criticisms and unpopular viewpoints to the fringes or off the Internet completely. >>>

"The notice and takedown provision is ripe for abuse," said Siva Vaidhyanathan, a University of Wisconsin professor critical of modern copyright laws. "It gives the accused no real due process."

Andreas Heldal-Lund, who runs the Scientology criticism site in question, says the effect is to strip the Internet of its value as a democratic medium where the strong and the meek can be equally heard.

Scientology lawyer Helena Kobrin insists the organization is trying to protect intellectual property -- not silence critics. She said Heldal-Lund's site, "Operation Clambake", made available substantial excerpts of copyrighted writings.

Heldal-Lund ignored repeated requests to stop, leaving the organization with no other recourse, Kobrin said.

The organization won several copyright lawsuits in the past to stop publication of its materials offline and online. It was a different case involving Scientology and online postings that helped persuade Congress to give Internet service providers immunity in the 1998 law. >>>

Danny Sullivan, editor of Search Engine Watch online newsletter, worries that others may get the idea that they, too, could use the DMCA law to silence critics.

Already, rival search engine Ask Jeeves saw a jump in removal requests "from virtually zero to getting a few" in recent weeks, said Sharon Anolik, the site's associate general counsel.

"It is a challenge for us to maintain our credibility and not engage in censorship, but to also comply" with the law, she said.

Even if silencing critics is not the intent, free-speech proponents believe the clause has that effect because it pressures service providers to remove materials and links without waiting for courts to determine whether such usage is permitted as "fair use."

And because few challenges are mounted, such temporary removals tend to become permanent. >>>

"People who are engaging in what you might describe as parody and fair use need to be willing to defend those rights, and that's expensive," said Stewart Baker, a lawyer who heads Steptoe & Johnson's technology practice.

"People are not always willing to do that."

Supporters take that unwillingness as a sign the law works. >>>

Though most removal requests are "within the realm of reason, ... a significant minority" misuse the provision, said Charles Kennedy, an Internet lawyer critical of the law. The copyright holder may never intend to follow through with a lawsuit, but decide to pressure service providers anyhow, he said.

"Why wouldn't you?" he said. "It doesn't cost you to try."

.....end of Fair Use educational extract . To Read the full article, go to :

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,49699,00.html

IOHO FACTNet Staff -- F.A.C.T.Net, Inc.

PO Box 3135 Boulder, CO 80307-3135 USA

* Web site http://www.factnet.org/ * Discussion Board http://www.factnet.org/discus/ * 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: bradenpb@adelphia.net (Pat Braden)
Subject: Randi on Scientology
Message-ID: <3cb1ea0a.14904371@news2.news.adelphia.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 06:55:57 GMT

http://www.randi.org/jr/040502.html

Half way down the page we find:

"Yes, the whole Scientology matter sounds like a bad script for a bad movie, but it's hogwash accepted by thousands of the gullible. To appreciate even more fully the zany philosophy that calls itself Scientology, go to www.xenu.net, and properly equipped with anti-nausea medication, read. This is the site that the Church of Scientology tried to get taken out of the Google.com listings! And for an excellent collection of articles on and about Scientology, visit www.freedomofmind.com/groups/scientology/scientology.asp "

Pat Braden bradenpb@xyzadelphia.net please remove the "xyz" when replying

From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Subject: AP: Xenu.net
Date: 7 Apr 2002 11:54:22 GMT
Message-ID: <a8pc1e$cn2@netaxs.com>

Legal Protection Turns Service Providers Into Speech Police Associated Press April 6, 2002 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,49699,00.html

NEW YORK � A 1998 federal law meant to combat digital piracy is increasingly being used to challenge free speech online as well.

In one recent case, the search engine Google removed links to a Norwegian site that criticizes the Church of Scientology International after the organization complained of copyright violations.

By law, Internet services like Google have no obligation to actively monitor and police their networks for copyright violations. But they must promptly take down any items upon notice from a copyright holder � or lose immunity protection from copyright lawsuits.

"The notice and takedown provision is ripe for abuse," said Siva Vaidhyanathan, a University of Wisconsin professor critical of modern copyright laws. "It gives the accused no real due process."

Heldal-Lund ignored repeated requests to stop, leaving the organization with no other recourse, Kobrin said.

"If we do not follow this framework, we risk being sued ... regardless of the merits of such a suit," Google said in a statement.

After the dispute became public, Google restored a link to the criticism site's home page but not inner links where criticisms and excerpts appear.

Danny Sullivan, editor of Search Engine Watch online newsletter, worries that others may get the idea that they, too, could use the DMCA law to silence critics.

Already, rival search engine Ask Jeeves saw a jump in removal requests "from virtually zero to getting a few" in recent weeks, said Sharon Anolik, the site's associate general counsel.

"It is a challenge for us to maintain our credibility and not engage in censorship, but to also comply" with the law, she said.

And because few challenges are mounted, such temporary removals tend to become permanent.

Heldal-Lund, who considers his criticisms a permissible fair use, isn't fighting the Google decision because he doesn't want to consent to U.S.

laws as a Norwegian citizen. Others lack the knowledge, time and money to fight.

"People are not always willing to do that."

Supporters take that unwillingness as a sign the law works.

"If there were a large number of cases of abuse, you'd be hearing about it," said Harris Miller, president of the Information Technology Association of America.

Most of the complaints about the 1998 copyright law have instead been over a separate section that makes it a crime to defeat copy-protection mechanisms. That provision has prompted free speech concerns as well, with researchers saying they can't publicize flaws in encryption programs.

Movie studios have cited the immunity clause when targeting service providers whose customers trade movies over file-sharing networks, while publishers have stopped books scanned and posted online. News organizations have gone after their articles posted on other Web sites.

Bob Kruger, vice president of enforcement at the Business Software Alliance, says dozens of removal notices are sent daily to Web sites � something easier and cheaper than finding and suing thousands of individuals and companies who are distributing pirated software.

InfoSpace Inc., which hosts Web sites, says it has received few complaints for shutting down accounts, while eBay Inc. says it is rarely challenged for canceling online auctions.

David Baker, a vice president with Internet service provider EarthLink, says the law is workable but not perfect, noting that businesses occasionally abuse it by "using it as a sword against would-be competitors."

"Why wouldn't you?" he said. "It doesn't cost you to try."

From: throwaway222000@yahoo.com (Not 4UToKnow)
Subject: CNN: Service providers as speech police?
Date: 7 Apr 2002 14:16:56 -0700
Message-ID: <b5e0ee5.0204071316.6c8e7f28@posting.google.com>

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/internet/04/07/online.speech.police.ap/index.html

Legal protections generate complex disputes

April 7, 2002 Posted: 9:54 AM EDT (1354 GMT)

NEW YORK (AP) -- A 1998 federal law meant to combat digital piracy is increasingly being used to challenge free speech online as well.

In one recent case, the search engine Google removed links to a Norwegian site that criticizes the Church of Scientology International after the organization complained of copyright violations.

By law, Internet services like Google have no obligation to actively monitor and police their networks for copyright violations. But they must promptly take down any items upon notice from a copyright holder -- or lose immunity protection from copyright lawsuits.

"The notice and takedown provision is ripe for abuse," said Siva Vaidhyanathan, a University of Wisconsin professor critical of modern copyright laws. "It gives the accused no real due process."

Heldal-Lund ignored repeated requests to stop, leaving the organization with no other recourse, Kobrin said.

"If we do not follow this framework, we risk being sued ... regardless of the merits of such a suit," Google said in a statement.

'Fair use'

After the dispute became public, Google restored a link to the criticism site's home page but not inner links where criticisms and excerpts appear.

Danny Sullivan, editor of Search Engine Watch online newsletter, worries that others may get the idea that they, too, could use the DMCA law to silence critics.

'Fair use'

Already, rival search engine Ask Jeeves saw a jump in removal requests "from virtually zero to getting a few" in recent weeks, said Sharon Anolik, the site's associate general counsel.

"It is a challenge for us to maintain our credibility and not engage in censorship, but to also comply" with the law, she said.

And because few challenges are mounted, such temporary removals tend to become permanent.

Heldal-Lund, who considers his criticisms a permissible fair use, isn't fighting the Google decision because he doesn't want to consent to U.S. laws as a Norwegian citizen. Others lack the knowledge, time and money to fight.

"People who are engaging in what you might describe as parody and fair use need to be willing to defend those rights, and that's expensive,"

said Stewart Baker, a lawyer who heads Steptoe & Johnson's technology practice. "People are not always willing to do that."

Removal notices

Supporters take that unwillingness as a sign the law works.

"If there were a large number of cases of abuse, you'd be hearing about it," said Harris Miller, president of the Information Technology Association of America.

Using lawsuits

Bob Kruger, vice president of enforcement at the Business Software Alliance, says dozens of removal notices are sent daily to Web sites -- something easier and cheaper than finding and suing thousands of individuals and companies who are distributing pirated software.

Using lawsuits

InfoSpace Inc., which hosts Web sites, says it has received few complaints for shutting down accounts, while eBay Inc. says it is rarely challenged for canceling online auctions.

"Why wouldn't you?" he said. "It doesn't cost you to try."

Go Back