backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 19 comment(s) - last by Trisped.. on Jul 5 at 12:15 PM
Yahoo is 2nd largest search engine in China, but certainly not immune to litigation

The problems for Yahoo China are continuing to mount. The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), the organization that protects international music interests, is suing Yahoo China because the search engine allegedly links to sites that are hosting illegally pirated music. Unless the two sides enter negotiations and come to an agreement, the search engine company will be sued in as early as “a few weeks.”  The IFPI claims that up to 90 percent of all music recordings in China are illegal.  It is not publicly known how much monetary compensation the IFPI will be seeking from Yahoo China and Baidu. 

Yahoo China isn't the only search engine company having problems. Baidu.com, the most used search engine in China, is being sued by EMI, Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Universal, Go East Entertainment Co., Gold Label Entertainment, Cinepoly Records and Warner Music Group.  The record companies plan to use a new law that became effective on July 1 which will fine the distributors of illegally copyrighted music and movies up to $12,500.  In theory, the search engines will have to browse and confirm each video and music link is a legitimate, non-copyrighted file.

As mentioned earlier in the article, Yahoo has had problems because of censorship and what some have considered unethical practices in China.  Yahoo is reportedly the biggest censor in China, according to Reporters Without Borders.  However, since Yahoo is operating its business in China, the company must abide by all laws and regulations of China.  The site is also being accused of taking part in getting a Chinese journalist jailed.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
search
By pepsimax2k on 7/4/2006 4:31:14 AM , Rating: 3
sooo... the problem is that, through searching yahoo, you can find pirated tracks? have I not been doing this for years with every search engine on the planet? i'd hope there was a better reason but given the music industry's track record, i doubt it.




RE: search
By Burning Bridges on 7/4/2006 7:15:24 AM , Rating: 2
I thought search engines where supposed to search everything on the web and give you results?

Rather than just searching for stuff that someone else thinks is OK.


RE: search
By masher2 (blog) on 7/4/2006 9:45:07 AM , Rating: 2
> "Rather than just searching for stuff that someone else thinks is OK ..."

Not "OK". Legal. Or do you think search engines should be allowed to link to databases of social security and credit card numbers, child pornography, and other material clearly prohibited by law?


RE: search
By wien on 7/4/2006 10:28:24 AM , Rating: 2
If the idiot that put those databases unsecured on the web can't even be arsed to write a robots.txt file, then yes, search engines should absolutely link to them. People that blame their own stupidity on others, don't deserve any better.


RE: search
By Kuroyama on 7/4/2006 10:40:25 AM , Rating: 2
If a thief who STOLE those databases (VA hospital anyone?) posts a "free sample" of them online then should the search engines link to them?


RE: search
By oTAL (blog) on 7/4/2006 11:06:58 AM , Rating: 2
yes!! the thief is to blame... not the search engine...!!
That's like arresting someone beacause you asked then "do you know anyone that steals car stereos?" and he said "I heard Joe steals car stereos..."
He just pointed out some knowledge... no crime commited...


RE: search
By wien on 7/4/2006 11:52:51 AM , Rating: 2
That would be against the law, now wouldn't it? So the person that STOLE the database should be dealt with by the proper authorities. The search engines just don't enter into it.


RE: search
By masher2 (blog) on 7/4/2006 11:58:59 AM , Rating: 2
> "The search engines just don't enter into it."

That's rather like saying someone fencing stolen goods shouldn't be liable...after all, they're not the ones who stole them, right?

If search engines are knowingly linking to illegal sites, then they're making a profit off them. And that makes them liable. If Yahoo China accidently spidered a few sites, that's one thing...but if they were informed of illegality, and refuse to address the situation, then they should be held fully accountable.


RE: search
By wien on 7/4/2006 2:51:51 PM , Rating: 2
Well.. fencing stolen goods is illegal where I come from, so... no.
quote:
If search engines are knowingly linking to illegal sites, then they're making a profit off them. And that makes them liable.
The whole point of a search engine is that they do nothing like that knowingly. They have a bot running around collecting information, and then display that to searchers. At no point is someone sitting there saying "Aah, I see we have some copyrighted material here. That'll make us some dough. Let me put that at the top of our search results.". Making Yahoogle hide search results doesn't really do anything either, as the stuff's still there. Making the person hosting the material remove it however, does help.

If anything, the record companies should be thankful search engines make it possible for them to find induviuals that post their copyrighted material online. Those are the fuggers they should be going after.


RE: search
By Trisped on 7/5/2006 12:14:13 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is that search engines are just that, engines, machines, programs that jump from link to link and collect pieces of data and organize them in a database so they can then be search for latter. Some of this data is found in meta tags, where content providers list key words they wish to be affiliated with. Some is from the page its self. The engine isn’t smart enough to know if a sight has illegal content or not. Neither are many people.

As for search engines displaying results from sites that don’t want the results displayed, that doesn’t happen if the site is written properly. As part of the header section a special meta tag can be used to indicate that search engines should not index the page.


typo
By mosesa5050 on 7/4/2006 4:03:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
distributors of illegally copyrighted music and movies up to $12,5000.


that should be "$125,000."




RE: typo
By masher2 (blog) on 7/4/06, Rating: 0
RE: typo
By Tuan Nguyen on 7/4/2006 4:36:21 PM , Rating: 2
Edited for accuracy.

Tuan


RE: typo
By masher2 (blog) on 7/4/2006 5:25:03 PM , Rating: 2
> "No, actually it should be 12,500... "

I wonder if the toothless cretin who chose to downgrade my innoculous, but factually correct post has enough backbone to state his reasons why.

Any takers?


RE: typo
By Trisped on 7/5/2006 12:06:51 PM , Rating: 2
Most typo correction posts are downgraded to 0 or -1 as soon as the problem is fixed. After all, we don't really need to know that they made a mistake and fixed it. You can check all of my typo posts to see the same.

Personally I just email them. Although they probably get 100x more notification, they are usually faster to react. Plus, it doesn't create off topic posts about how much people hate Daily Tech because their grammar isn't perfect.

PS It wasn't me, I only down grade posts I think are unintelligent or wrong. After all, I keep it at -1, so I am going to read them all anyways.


ppl missing the point here
By ChugokuOtaku on 7/5/2006 8:38:04 AM , Rating: 2
For those of you who'd never visited the search engine, this is the link:
http://music.yahoo.com.cn/

the difference between any other search engine capable of pulling up sites with links to mp3s and the one in question is that the Yahoo! China has a designated mp3 search engine that directly links mp3 files available for download(also does wma, rm, etc). This allows searching for "pirated" music online highly efficient... which is probably what got these record industries off their asses to sue.




RE: ppl missing the point here
By masher2 (blog) on 7/5/2006 9:10:37 AM , Rating: 2
> "Yahoo! China has a designated mp3 search engine..."

Excellent find. And yes, I agree, this makes all the difference in the world.


RE: ppl missing the point here
By Trisped on 7/5/2006 12:15:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
> "Yahoo! China has a designated mp3 search engine..."

Excellent find. And yes, I agree, this makes all the difference in the world.
Ditto


By darkfoon on 7/4/2006 10:00:41 AM , Rating: 3
They're just suing Yahoo because they can't get at the actual websites that are serving up the illegal music.

This is a rather stupid case, they might as well sue china, that's who they're really going after




"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki