[A2k] A2k Digest, Vol 25, Issue 22

Sean Flynn sflynn at wcl.american.edu
Sat May 26 10:47:51 PDT 2012



"a2k-request at lists.keionline.org" <a2k-request at lists.keionline.org> wrote:

Send A2k mailing list submissions to
	a2k at lists.keionline.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.keionline.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k_lists.keionline.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	a2k-request at lists.keionline.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	a2k-owner at lists.keionline.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of A2k digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. "Heavy-handed" TPP tactics from US Trade Rep (Peter Maybarduk)
   2. Wikimedia Foundation endorses mandates for free access to
      publicly funded research (Manon Ress)
   3. Check it out: Google on Copyright Takedowns: Reveals Detailed
      Data On Who Requests Link Removals (Manon Ress)
   4. Re: Check it out: Google on Copyright Takedowns: Reveals
      Detailed Data On Who Requests Link Removals (Erik Josefsson)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 11:15:50 -0500
From: Peter Maybarduk <pmaybarduk at citizen.org>
To: "ip-health at lists.keionline.org" <ip-health at lists.keionline.org>
Cc: "a2k at lists.keionline.org" <a2k at lists.keionline.org>
Subject: [A2k] "Heavy-handed" TPP tactics from US Trade Rep
Message-ID:
	<7A38D634983D414EBCD5D940CACABC8DCDC1EDC7 at MBX17.exg5.exghost.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

http://www.citizenvox.org/2012/05/25/heavy-handed-tpp-tactics/

It seems "high-quality" is being sacrificed for high speed.

Snip:

Meanwhile, negotiators of chapters that are taking time for review and input are now getting a little punishment. For example, intellectual property negotiators who have been appropriately scrutinizing proposals that would transform their countries' laws regarding generic medicines<http://infojustice.org/archives/23270>, internet freedom <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-knievel/next-sopa-going-global_b_1421666.html> and much more, have reportedly been dragged before the assembled Chiefs more than once to face pointed questions about what's taking so long. USTR is driving this new tactic, which even the US Chief Negotiator described as a more "heavy-handed approach."


------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 12:30:32 -0400
From: Manon Ress <manon.ress at keionline.org>
To: a2k discuss list <a2k at lists.keionline.org>,	ip-health
	<ip-health at lists.keionline.org>
Subject: [A2k] Wikimedia Foundation endorses mandates for free access
	to publicly funded research
Message-ID:
	<CAJ4KiVtGYvCG_vh7mV26Zu_KUi=JA22xtk5rSNNtVHQ_1q2_Uw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

Sorry for cross posting but many public health groups and A2K
supporters should also sign on.

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/05/25/wikimedia-foundation-endorses-mandates-for-free-access-to-publicly-funded-research/

To sign:
https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/#!/petition/require-free-access-over-internet-scientific-journal-articles-arising-taxpayer-funded-research/wDX82FLQ

Wikimedia Foundation endorses mandates for free access to publicly
funded research
Posted by Dario Taraborelli on May 25th, 2012

Scholarly information is often too expensive to access. Academic
publishers sell journal subscriptions for thousands of dollars per
journal per year. Typically, only universities and large libraries,
not individuals, are able to pay those fees, which limits access to
researchers and others affiliated with institutions with money.

Are these costs justifiable when the underlying research is publicly
funded and the underlying goal is public knowledge? If you?re a
taxpayer you?ve already paid to fund the research, so why should you
pay essentially another tax to read the findings of that research?

On May 20, a team of longtime advocates for public access to scholarly
information launched a campaign to urge U.S. President Barack Obama to
?require free access over the Internet to journal articles arising
from taxpayer-funded research.? Opening up publicly-funded research
will ?provide access to patients and caregivers, students and their
teachers, researchers, entrepreneurs, and other taxpayers who paid for
the research.?

This is consistent with Wikimedia?s non-profit mission ?to empower and
engage people around the world to collect and develop educational
content under a free license or in the public domain, and to
disseminate it effectively and globally.?

Click to view a video by the Scholarly Publishing and Academic
Research Coalition about the petition

Wikimedia project volunteers, who are among the taxpayers, should not
be denied free access to this information. They should be empowered to
read it, report on it, and cite it. Wikipedia and its sister projects
depend on the energy and unselfish dedication of this team of
contributors ? volunteers, researchers, and amateurs ? who read and
investigate sources as they work to compile accurate, up-to-date,
verifiable knowledge. Each month, hundreds of millions of global
readers view, and have the opportunity to evaluate and contribute to
Wikimedia content. Many do not have the means (nor should they be
required) to pay for knowledge, including useful economic, health and
scientific information when their taxes fund the research.

We believe in open access and free licensing as fundamental forces to
disseminate knowledge, support education and accelerate discovery.

Today, the Wikimedia Foundation is endorsing this petition, joining
thousands of individuals and organizations expressing support for free
access to taxpayer-funded research articles. We hope you will join us,
too?anyone over age 13 can sign (and you do not need to be a US
citizen).

Please consider signing this petition to mandate that all research
funded by U.S. taxpayers be made freely available to the citizens of
the Web.

Dario Taraborelli, Senior Research Analyst, Wikimedia Foundation
Geoff Brigham, General Counsel, Wikimedia Foundation
Kat Walsh, Member of the Wikimedia Board of Trustees

    Copyright notes: "Library Appeal, 1973" by London School of
Economics, under CC-BY-SA 3.0 Unported, from Wikimedia Commons, Video
by SPARC supporting the petition, under CC-BY


-- 
Manon Anne Ress
Knowledge Ecology International
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20009 USA
http://www.keionline.org
manon.ress at keionline.org



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 07:15:35 -0400
From: Manon Ress <manon.ress at keionline.org>
To: a2k discuss list <a2k at lists.keionline.org>
Subject: [A2k] Check it out: Google on Copyright Takedowns: Reveals
	Detailed Data On Who Requests Link Removals
Message-ID:
	<CAJ4KiVun0LNnH2mA32iWZs7btMWqMrp0D82Vz4AaXmBWbp6zgg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

Google Lifts The Veil On Copyright Takedowns: Reveals Detailed Data On
Who Requests Link Removals

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120523/17520119054/google-lifts-veil-copyright-takedowns-reveals-detailed-data-who-requests-link-removals.shtml

from the data-data-data dept

As part of Google's ongoing Transparency Report efforts, today the
company has released a whole new section on copyright takedowns,
containing a huge amount of information on the many takedown requests
Google receives. It focuses specifically on the takedowns for search
links, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them add other areas later.
As you may recall, we were among those who were victimized by a bogus
takedown, and a key post about SOPA that we had written was missing
from Google search for about a month.

The new transparency platform lets you dig in and see quite a few
details about exactly who is issuing takedowns and what they're
removing from search. It's using data since last July (when Google set
up an organized web-form, so the data is consistent). It may be a bit
surprising, but at the top of the list? Microsoft, who has apparently
taken down over 2.5 million URLs from Google's search results. Most of
the the others in the top 10 aren't too surprising. There's NBC
Universal at number two. The RIAA at number three (representing all
its member companies). BPI at number five. Universal Music at number
seven. Sony Music at number eight. Warner Music doesn't clock in until
number 12.

Perhaps more important, however, is that Google is also revealing the
incredible deluge of takedown requests it receives in search, each of
which it tries to check to make sure they're legitimate. As it stands
now, Google is processing over 250,000 such requests per week -- which
is more than they got in the entire year of 2009. For all of 2011,
Google receive 3.3 million copyright takedowns for search... and here
we are in just May of 2012, and they're already processing over 1.2
million per month. And while we've heard reports from the usual Google
haters that Google is slow to respond to takedowns, it says that its
average turnaround time last week was 11 hours. Think about that for a
second. It's reviewing each one of these takedowns, getting 250,000
per week... and can still process them in less than 12 hours. That's
pretty impressive.

It's also interesting to hear that these reviews catch some pretty
flagrant bogus takedown requests:
....
    At the same time, we try to catch erroneous or abusive removal
requests. For example, we recently rejected two requests from an
organization representing a major entertainment company, asking us to
remove a search result that linked to a major newspaper?s review of a
TV show. The requests mistakenly claimed copyright violations of the
show, even though there was no infringing content. We?ve also seen
baseless copyright removal requests being used for anticompetitive
purposes, or to remove content unfavorable to a particular person or
company from our search results.

It's good to see Google catch these, as plenty of other sites would
automatically take such content down, just to avoid any question of
liability. Of course, it doesn't catch them all. Some get through --
as we ourselves discovered a few months ago. That led us to wonder if
this tool could drill down and find the details about takedowns
targeting Techdirt, but unfortunately at the moment there doesn't seem
to be any way to actually search the list. Hopefully that will change
soon. Update: The search function is not currently advertised
anywhere, but you can access it by using a URL:
http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/domains/yourdomain.com/

Of course, this is also a good reminder -- as they note in the Google
blog post -- that if you run a website, you should absolutely sign up
to use Google's Webmaster tools, which will quickly inform you when
one of your URLs are targeted by such a takedown, allowing you to
easily file a counternotice.

Either way, this is really fascinating data and an interesting
platform, shedding some significant light on just how often copyright
holders are trying to take links out of Google, who's doing it and who
they're targeting.
End of quote

http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/

quote: Google regularly receives requests from copyright owners and
reporting organizations that represent them to remove search results
that link to material that allegedly infringes copyrights. Each
request names specific URLs to be removed, and we list the domain
portions of URLs requested to be removed under targeted domains.
Copyright removal requests received for Search in the past month
1,294,762 URLs Requested to be Removed
24,268 	Targeted Domains
1,325 	Copyright Owners
1,109 	Reporting Organizations
http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/

Notice by gov:
http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/government/

-- 
Manon Anne Ress
Knowledge Ecology International
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20009 USA
http://www.keionline.org
manon.ress at keionline.org



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 13:30:57 +0200
From: Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson at gmail.com>
To: a2k at lists.keionline.org
Subject: Re: [A2k] Check it out: Google on Copyright Takedowns:
	Reveals Detailed Data On Who Requests Link Removals
Message-ID: <4FC0BEF1.1000808 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

I think 11 hours is also the average time a patent examiner spends on a
patent application (which in some sense is an infringement investigation).

Just came to think of it.

Good job Google!!

//Erik


On 05/26/2012 01:15 PM, Manon Ress wrote:
> Google Lifts The Veil On Copyright Takedowns: Reveals Detailed Data On
> Who Requests Link Removals
>
> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120523/17520119054/google-lifts-veil-copyright-takedowns-reveals-detailed-data-who-requests-link-removals.shtml
>
> from the data-data-data dept
>
> As part of Google's ongoing Transparency Report efforts, today the
> company has released a whole new section on copyright takedowns,
> containing a huge amount of information on the many takedown requests
> Google receives. It focuses specifically on the takedowns for search
> links, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them add other areas later.
> As you may recall, we were among those who were victimized by a bogus
> takedown, and a key post about SOPA that we had written was missing
> from Google search for about a month.
>
> The new transparency platform lets you dig in and see quite a few
> details about exactly who is issuing takedowns and what they're
> removing from search. It's using data since last July (when Google set
> up an organized web-form, so the data is consistent). It may be a bit
> surprising, but at the top of the list? Microsoft, who has apparently
> taken down over 2.5 million URLs from Google's search results. Most of
> the the others in the top 10 aren't too surprising. There's NBC
> Universal at number two. The RIAA at number three (representing all
> its member companies). BPI at number five. Universal Music at number
> seven. Sony Music at number eight. Warner Music doesn't clock in until
> number 12.
>
> Perhaps more important, however, is that Google is also revealing the
> incredible deluge of takedown requests it receives in search, each of
> which it tries to check to make sure they're legitimate. As it stands
> now, Google is processing over 250,000 such requests per week -- which
> is more than they got in the entire year of 2009. For all of 2011,
> Google receive 3.3 million copyright takedowns for search... and here
> we are in just May of 2012, and they're already processing over 1.2
> million per month. And while we've heard reports from the usual Google
> haters that Google is slow to respond to takedowns, it says that its
> average turnaround time last week was 11 hours. Think about that for a
> second. It's reviewing each one of these takedowns, getting 250,000
> per week... and can still process them in less than 12 hours. That's
> pretty impressive.
>
> It's also interesting to hear that these reviews catch some pretty
> flagrant bogus takedown requests:
> ....
>     At the same time, we try to catch erroneous or abusive removal
> requests. For example, we recently rejected two requests from an
> organization representing a major entertainment company, asking us to
> remove a search result that linked to a major newspaper?s review of a
> TV show. The requests mistakenly claimed copyright violations of the
> show, even though there was no infringing content. We?ve also seen
> baseless copyright removal requests being used for anticompetitive
> purposes, or to remove content unfavorable to a particular person or
> company from our search results.
>
> It's good to see Google catch these, as plenty of other sites would
> automatically take such content down, just to avoid any question of
> liability. Of course, it doesn't catch them all. Some get through --
> as we ourselves discovered a few months ago. That led us to wonder if
> this tool could drill down and find the details about takedowns
> targeting Techdirt, but unfortunately at the moment there doesn't seem
> to be any way to actually search the list. Hopefully that will change
> soon. Update: The search function is not currently advertised
> anywhere, but you can access it by using a URL:
> http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/domains/yourdomain.com/
>
> Of course, this is also a good reminder -- as they note in the Google
> blog post -- that if you run a website, you should absolutely sign up
> to use Google's Webmaster tools, which will quickly inform you when
> one of your URLs are targeted by such a takedown, allowing you to
> easily file a counternotice.
>
> Either way, this is really fascinating data and an interesting
> platform, shedding some significant light on just how often copyright
> holders are trying to take links out of Google, who's doing it and who
> they're targeting.
> End of quote
>
> http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/
>
> quote: Google regularly receives requests from copyright owners and
> reporting organizations that represent them to remove search results
> that link to material that allegedly infringes copyrights. Each
> request names specific URLs to be removed, and we list the domain
> portions of URLs requested to be removed under targeted domains.
> Copyright removal requests received for Search in the past month
> 1,294,762 URLs Requested to be Removed
> 24,268 	Targeted Domains
> 1,325 	Copyright Owners
> 1,109 	Reporting Organizations
> http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/
>
> Notice by gov:
> http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/government/
>




------------------------------

_______________________________________________
A2k mailing list
A2k at lists.keionline.org
http://lists.keionline.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k_lists.keionline.org


End of A2k Digest, Vol 25, Issue 22
***********************************




More information about the A2k mailing list