Funny how statistics and conclusions change as the "word-goes-around", how it can be manipulated and twisted around to promote an agenda, and how uncritical some are against what actually lies behind the numbers and words they are presented. Not to mention the timelines. Pulling something stoneaged out of the hat from when time, technologies and things were very different, makes the arguments more or less useless.
1. The headline here suggests Google says 57% "trying to gimp each other".
2. The article suggests it's 37%:
Quote:
|
In 2009, Google noted when challenging a proposed New Zealand copyright law that 57 percent of its takedown requests were from businesses targeting their competitors, while 37 percent weren?t valid copyright claims at all.
|
"At all". 37% were not valid "at all" the article claims...
3. But their source says:
Quote:
In its submission, Google notes that more than half (57%) of the takedown notices it has received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act 1998, were sent by business targeting competitors and over one third (37%) of notices were not valid copyright claims.
http://pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/pcw.nsf...rs-section-92a
|
Here, the other article does not use the phrase "at all", but "were not valid". And it doesn't explain what that means.
Further on, it doesn't explain if 37% are of the total amount of notices or out of those 57% (which would give 21%).
4. That article has quoted a footnote from a submission made by Google back in 2009:
Here, Google use the words "improper" and "inaccuracy", and in the footnote they also leave out what those 37% actually are.
5. Now lets go to the
old (2006) original paper footnoted, but not explained in details by Google:
Quote:
we found some interesting patterns that do not, by themselves, indicate
concern, but which are of concern when combined with the fact that one third of the
notices depended on questionable claims:
- Over half?57%?of notices sent to Google to demand removal of links in the
index were sent by businesses targeting apparent competitors;
- Over a third?37%?of the notices sent to Google targeted sites apparently
outside the United States.
http://static.chillingeffects.org/Ur...12-summary.pdf
|
So, those 37% are nothing but notices that are outside US jurisdiction and not directly subject to DMCA. But that doesn't mean they are not still valid "at all" in terms of general copyright claims and it certainly does not back up what is suggested here.