What the Tech?! Free tech support Archive
This is a read-only archive. No new posts or registrations. Privacy Page
Discussion

"De-indexed" from Google, Facebook..

3 min read

This thread's last reply is from . Advice, software, and links below may be out of date — treat specific steps and download links with caution.

Post #1
FYI…

"De-indexed" from Google, Facebook - recent court orders…
- http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/20…ng-facebook.ars
November 29, 2011 - "After a series of one-sided hearings, luxury goods maker Chanel has won recent court orders against hundreds of websites trafficking in -counterfeit- luxury goods. A federal judge in Nevada has agreed that Chanel can seize the domain names in question and transfer them all to US-based registrar GoDaddy. The judge also ordered "all Internet search engines" and "all social media websites"— explicitly naming Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Bing, Yahoo, and Google — to "de-index" the domain names and to remove them from any search results… Concerned about counterfeiting, Chanel has filed a joint suit in Nevada against nearly 700 domain names that appear to have nothing in common. (A recent November 14 order went after an additional 228 sites; none had a chance to contest the request until after it was approved and the names had been seized.)… For the most recent batch of names, Chanel hired a Nevada investigator to order from three of the 228 sites in question. When the orders arrived, they were reviewed by a Chanel official and declared counterfeit. The other 225 sites were seized based on a Chanel anti-counterfeiting specialist browsing the Web. That was good enough for Judge Kent Dawson to order the names seized and transferred to GoDaddy, where they would all redirect to a page serving notice of the seizure. In addition, a total ban on search engine indexing was ordered, one which neither Bing nor Google appears to have complied with yet. Missing from the ruling is any discussion of the Internet's global nature; the judge shows no awareness that the domains in question might not even be registered in this country, for instance, and his ban on search engine and social media indexing apparently extends to the entire world…"

:ph34r: :blink:
Post #2 last edited
I'm familiar enough with neither the technology nor the law as they apply here to comment competently about the implications and potential consequences. However in my opinion, it is long since past time to reign in the fraudsters. I don't expect others to wholeheartedly agree with me, but when I refer to "fraudsters" I include many of the mainstream as well as the readily identifiable rogues. For instance, various ad services available to monetize websites do not allow sufficient choice on the part of a website to control the ads that are rotated into their website displays. This can and has resulted in objectionable products and utilities being advertised on the very same help-sites whose members would routinely recommend to remove such products and utilities as excessively risky. That's just not acceptable in my opinion. In other avenues of riskware, it is not acceptable in my opinion for counterfeiters and more blatantly malicious entities to have safe harbor in nation states who tolerate and benefit from such safe harboring. It may seem obvious that US law cannot and should not be applied to the choices and actions of other countries. However, I would wholeheartedly support sensoring to the point of full exclusion from US access, any ISP or IP whose business it is to purvey malicious ware or to conduct fraudulent business. Yep. Take steps to deny them access to our marketplace. It may seem cold-hearted or prone to risk of overkill of freedom of expression, but I do not support tolerance of, nor extending anonymity and safe-harbored access to those whose conduct is criminal. In my limited experience, easily 60% of "computer repair" is related to crapware, riskware, and frankly malicious malware. Again in my limited experience, the overwhelming majority of financial loss and breach of contract in ordinary online commercial activity is related to malicious breach of legitimate databases and deliberate socially engineered fraud. It is long past time to eliminate anonymous status and safe harbor for such folks who perpetrate that kind of malicious activity.