A copyright complaint can result in a page being removed from Google search results based on a notice, even if the ownership claims are later disputed or inaccurate. According to Press Gazette, this happened twice this year.
At the end of June, the journalist trade publication reported that a second part of its coverage of the marketing company Clickout Media had been removed from Google searches following an anonymous complaint under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
An earlier removal in March impacted the original investigation in the same series. Both complaints cited unrelated content as the source. Press Gazette described both complaints as false.
The details of who submitted it are still somewhat unclear. The March message came via a “US hub” from an anonymous private entity, while the June message came from a sender the outlet could not identify. In both cases, an active original page was removed from Google results and Press Gazette questions the ownership claims behind each communication.
In March, that allegedly copied work was a 2024 article on the tech website The Verge that was unrelated to the complaint. In June it was a month-old forum post about online casinos that has now been deleted. None of these corresponded to the reporting they were intended to target.
The March shutdown wasn’t limited to a single item. Additionally, a continuation of the same story was removed from another trade publication.
This is how distance works
Under the DMCA, someone claiming to own a copyright can send a notice to Google asking it to remove a page from search results. The page may be removed from the list if Google responds to the notice. The burden of challenge then falls on the website owner.
Google’s representation of the system leaves room for this result. In its transparency report, Google says that people submitting requests may provide inaccurate information, that Google is not always able to verify the accuracy of a request, and that it cannot always notify a site owner before removing content.
The law does not require Google to decide whether the copyright claim itself is valid, which is why a disputed page may disappear from search results for a long time even after the owner objects. Roger Montti explained why the law leaves Google little leeway. When a page is removed from the list, Google adds a line to the bottom of the affected results page. It notes that the results were removed due to a DMCA complaint and includes a link to the Lumen database where the notice is stored. A user only notices this gap when reading this far down.
A tactic that has appeared before
Deactivations due to copyright violations have previously targeted search results. In 2018, I reported on a tactic in which people posing as rights holders filed fake DMCA notices to push competitors down in search rankings. Sometimes they even used names that resembled real companies to make their claims seem credible. These targets ranged from pirate sites to at least one small business challenged by a competitor.
The vulnerability also occurs with other removal tools. Roger Montti reported last August on a Google bug that allowed anonymous attackers to use the public URL removal tool to de-index live pages, and a site lost more than 400 articles that were still online.
Google’s Danny Sullivan said there was no way to prevent these removals at the time. Although it was a different exploit, the core problem was similar. A removal system designed for a specific purpose can unexpectedly become a means to remove content that someone wants removed.
The Press Gazette case is part of a larger discussion about the company and its reporting. The report describes a parasitic SEO operation in which a company purchases established websites to increase its Google presence. The SEJ investigated this practice in November. Google defended its efforts to enforce website reputation rules when the European Commission began its investigation.
The scale is difficult to measure
It is quite difficult to determine how often false or controversial communications are successful. Lumen, which operates as a research project, has tens of millions of takedown notices covering billions of URLs. Researchers have used this resource to uncover organized copyright abuse campaigns, often aimed at reputation management.
Lumen itself points out that a note in its archive does not prove that the request was legitimate or that a platform actually responded to it. The file only shows what was requested, not whether the claim was correct.
Google says it rejects requests it deems abusive or inaccurate, and Techdirt has described Google as being more aggressive than most sites in rejecting questionable DMCA notices. In the March case, SEO consultant Glenn Gabe wrote on The June complaint was still in effect when Press Gazette reported it.
Why this is important
The takedown process may seem like a small step because the person filing a report does not face many immediate practical consequences. A false claim doesn’t cost much either. The affected individual or entity must notice the removal, file a counter-notice, and then go through the process, which can be somewhat daunting.
The imbalance affects how long a side is missing. When the March article was removed from Press Gazette, it was quickly restored within a day or so of contacting Google. However, the June article was still missing when they published their addendum. In such cases, range can affect how quickly a distance is verified. The news organization was able to publicly address the initial removal, something most websites are unable to do.
A page removed due to an erroneous complaint may remain out of Google results for the duration of the rebuttal process, which can take at least days and often longer. For a page that generates leads or sales, this gap has a direct cost. Removal also occurs silently, so a site owner may not realize a page is gone until traffic slows down.
What you can do
You can shorten the time a takedown goes unnoticed. Google’s removal line is located at the bottom of the results page for affected searches, so you may see one when searching for your own important headlines and pages. A sudden drop in impressions or clicks for a single URL in Search Console can be an early sign that should be checked. The Lumen database allows you to search for clues that name your domain.
If a page is removed and you believe the claim is false, Google’s process allows for a counter-notice. A quick submission is important because the recovery clock won’t start until Google receives it. Google’s DMCA help pages explain the steps and content of a counter-notice. The waiting period of 10 to 14 working days after a valid counter-notice is required by law.
It also helps to keep time-stamped copies of your own work. A public archival record of a page with its publication date will provide you with evidence of original authorship if a later complaint alleges that you copied it.
None of this stands in the way of a complaint. It narrows the window of time between distance and reaction, which is the part you control.
Looking ahead
Some of the legal reasons for this issue are beyond Google’s control and lead to a debate about whether the opt-out system should be updated.
This debate could last for years. The more pressing question is how quickly you would notice if one of your pages suddenly disappeared. Watching your own moves is a weak defense, but it’s the best option available at the moment.
More resources
Featured Image: Summit Art Creations/Shutterstock
Follow us on Facebook | Twitter | YouTube
WPAP (907)
