Chilling Effects
Home Weather Reports Report Receiving a Cease and Desist Notice Search the Database Topics
Topic HomeFAQsMonitoring the legal climate for Internet activity
Chilling Effects
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > DMCA Notices > Notices > URLs DMCA (Copyright) Complaint to Google (NoticeID 487995, Printer-friendly version

URLs DMCA (Copyright) Complaint to Google

July 21, 2012


Sender Information:
Christine Houck
Sent by:

Recipient Information:

Google, Inc.

Mountain View, CA, 94043, USA

Sent via: email
Re: Your Request to Google

AutoDetectedBrowser: Internet Explorer 9
AutoDetectedOS: Windows 7
IIILanguage: en
IssueType: lr_circumvention
Language: en
agree: checked
circumvention_additional_comments: I'm not disputing the right to display a
public record image or freedom of speech under the first amendment.
However, this business does not have the legal right to sell the removal or
the use of the image or information. Of note, the registered owner of the
site is Mr. Watson PO Box 1571 Clarksburg Wv. As you know Mr. Watson is
Sherlock Holmes fictious sidekick and Clarksburg Wv is the home to the FBI.
Something is suspicious with this site and it's owner. PayPal is
investigating as is the Oregon Attorney General's office. The AG
recommended i contact you to ask for removal to help facilitate the
process. Thank you for your help.
circumvention_injured: This image contains my personal date of birth,
height and weight but the name is incorrectly spelled and the picture is
not me. Oregon corrections has corrected the problem but US Support LLC
who owns these URLs refuses to take remove the post unless I pay them. We
paid once already and a week later we found it up again.
circumvention_what_product: Two concerns with this site, although mugshots
are public records the personal identitfying information is not released by
the State of Oregon. This site publishes the person's full name, date of
birth, height and weight along with a number they, the site owner claims is
the booking ID number which it is not. Oregon allows posting of the images
not the personal identitfying information. This site
or is charging people for removal of the image but reposts the
image a week later. Using PayPal, the site/business is internet based goods
not services. The state of Oregon does not grant permission to sell the
images only to publish.
circumvention_what_ways: The copyright belongs to the state of Oregon. The
site owner of does not have the rights to sell removal of the
country_residence: US
full_name: Christine Houck
geolocation: US
hidden_product: websearch
represented_copyright_holder_circumvention: Christine Houck

FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]

Question: Why does a search engine get DMCA takedown notices for materials in its search listings?

Answer: Many copyright claimants are making complaints under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 512(d), a safe-harbor for providers of "information location tools." These safe harbors give providers immunity from liability for users' possible copyright infringement -- if they "expeditiously" remove material when they get complaints. Whether or not the provider would have been liable for infringement by users' materials it links to, the provider can avoid the possibility of a lawsuit for money damages by following the DMCA's takedown procedure when it gets a complaint. The person whose information was removed can file a counter-notification if he or she believes the complaint was erroneous.

Question: What does a service provider have to do in order to qualify for safe harbor protection?

Answer: In addition to informing its customers of its policies (discussed above), a service provider must follow the proper notice and takedown procedures (discussed above) and also meet several other requirements in order to qualify for exemption under the safe harbor provisions.

In order to facilitate the notification process in cases of infringement, ISPs which allow users to store information on their networks, such as a web hosting service, must designate an agent that will receive the notices from copyright owners that its network contains material which infringes their intellectual property rights. The service provider must then notify the Copyright Office of the agent's name and address and make that information publicly available on its web site. [512(c)(2)]

Finally, the service provider must not have knowledge that the material or activity is infringing or of the fact that the infringing material exists on its network. [512(c)(1)(A)], [512(d)(1)(A)]. If it does discover such material before being contacted by the copyright owners, it is instructed to remove, or disable access to, the material itself. [512(c)(1)(A)(iii)], [512(d)(1)(C)]. The service provider must not gain any financial benefit that is attributable to the infringing material. [512(c)(1)(B)], [512(d)(2)].

Question: What are the provisions of 17 U.S.C. Section 512(c)(3) & 512(d)(3)?

Answer: Section 512(c)(3) sets out the elements for notification under the DMCA. Subsection A (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(A)) states that to be effective a notification must include: 1) a physical/electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the infringed right; 2) identification of the copyrighted works claimed to have been infringed; 3) identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed; 4) information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party (e.g., the address, telephone number, or email address); 5) a statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material is not authorized by the copyright owner; and 6) a statement that information in the complaint is accurate and that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner. Subsection B (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(B)) states that if the complaining party does not substantially comply with these requirements the notice will not serve as actual notice for the purpose of Section 512.

Section 512(d)(3), which applies to "information location tools" such as search engines and directories, incorporates the above requirements; however, instead of the identification of the allegedly infringing material, the notification must identify the reference or link to the material claimed to be infringing.

Question: Does a service provider have to follow the safe harbor procedures?

Answer: No. An ISP may choose not to follow the DMCA takedown process, and do without the safe harbor. If it would not be liable under pre-DMCA copyright law (for example, because it is not contributorily or vicariously liable, or because there is no underlying copyright infringement), it can still raise those same defenses if it is sued.

Question: How do I file a DMCA counter-notice?

Answer: If you believe your material was removed because of mistake or misidentification, you can file a "counter notification" asking the service provider to put it back up. Chilling Effects offers a form to build your own counter-notice.

For more information on the DMCA Safe Harbors, see the FAQs on DMCA Safe Harbor. For more information on Copyright and defenses to copyright infringement, see Copyright.

Topic maintained by Chilling Effects

Topic Frequently Asked Questions (and Answers)
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse -
disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts