Quote:
Originally Posted by drexl
Concerns about them:
- they file against legit material, ie: promotools licensed by cam sponsors.
- they file notices that are unrelated to the URLs they include in the report. For example they file a notice for model M1 of Chaturbate and in the list of presumed offending URLs it shows: M2 of StripChat, M3 of StripChat , ...etc ...
- they are inconsiderate: they also add generic URLs thus de-indexing entire pages such as "[domain]/tags/livecams"
Also: can they be competitors who want to get an unfair advantage by de-indexing other webmasters? I find strange that some cam sites don't seem to be affected by those "agents".
|
Just got reply from Google:
As described in 17 U.S.C. 512(g), we will forward the counter notification to the complainant. If we do not receive notice that the complainant has brought a court action within 10 business days, we will reinstate the material in question.