Google: Quick searches censored

Google has recently introduced its much touted "autocomplete" and "instant search" functions, but with their introduction, it has become apparent that these functions do not complete terms relating to online piracy. Terms like "BitTorrent" and "Vodo" will therefore not show up automatically in your search bar.

This is in no way a major censorship issue, and Google's likely argument that it cannot promote illegal content since it is illegal, certainly holds some merits. It is, however, noteworthy that not every website that uses the torrent technology is actually illegal. There are websites, for example, that provides legal music and legal movies solely.

TheAtlantic.com raises an interesting question about Google's willingness to censor information:

"Even if we were to pretend that all torrent downloads were illegal, Google's blocking has raised some interesting questions about its relationship with potentially criminal activities. Last I checked, making an explosive is a pretty serious crime; but when we type 'how to make a bomb' in the search bar, Google suggests 'out of household items' to complete the phrase. Write 'where to buy drugs' and 'where to buy crack in D.C.' is the instant result. Enter 'how to kill a person' and 'and get away with it' is what Google recommends. Gosh, it's really swell of Google to do its part to shut down all of the menacing downloading out there! I'm all for the freedom of potentially scandalous, even illegal information, but shouldn't it be consistent? Autocomplete has even blocked the phrase 'Google and crime.'

Or what about autocomplete's questionable assistance with what may be legal, but still offensive terms? Type in 'Asians have' and autocomplete is right there with 'no souls.' Try 'Jews have' instead and 'horns' is the result that the search giant recommends. Enter 'Black people are' and Google spits out 'lazy.' And why do we get help with 'sexual predators' but not 'sexual positions'? There are no obvious answers."

The reality here is that Google's decisions are probably affected by industry pressure. It is understandable that the company does not want to end up having to fight these companies in law suits, and that they thus back off. Still, the argument that Google is a company that should actually be able to take the fight, is a compelling one.

Google will begin censoring torrent searches

It isn't unexpected at all, but Google has now decided that it will begin censoring searches so that people will no longer be able to use Google to find torrent sites and places that might be distributing pirated content. Under the new standard, takedown requests will be responded to within 24 hours and after that, searches will no longer show the sites that have been "taken down" from the results page.

This is problematic, of course, because Google is used by many people across the world. It seems to be a forgotten issue, but torrent websites can be used to download legal material and while torrent sites would never become particularly popular if they hosted only legal material, they do represent a platform for people who wish to distribute such content too.

It is problematic, moreover, that search engines seem to be held accountable to some degree, for search results they simply find. This seems to have become established since the website torrent-finder.com was among the seized website this week, even if it did not in any way host any illegal content, or even actual torrent files, on its platform.

More on the Google story here.

Avoiding US Censorship, Torrent Sites May Flee To China

After the American government seized 82 domain names this week, there has been discussions on what this means for torrent sites hosted in the United States. TorrentFreak, a website that deals with torrent related issues, has offered one suggestion on their website recently:

"China is often criticized for its Internet censorship practices. Although this is certainly valid with regard to political issues, the United States is rapidly becoming one of the most progressive countries when it comes to commercial censorship. Safeguarding commercial interests is increasingly preferred above the rights of the general public. Ironically, BitTorrent sites may have to flee to China to keep their ‘freedom’." The full story can be read here.

It is, of course, ironic that a country where freedoms do not tend to be the priority, may very well be the best place to continue such practices. This situation is, however, entirely a creation of the west, with increasing tendencies to control the content on the Internet.

Torrent websites do tend to focus on illegal material and although this material is not hosted directly on the websites that are targeted, the websites make the distribution possible. This has been found to be illegal in several cases. Although the confiscation of domains that host illegal material is not entirely unwarranted, it does, however, constitute one step towards blocking other content. Past examples show that when one step is first taken, the next step goes easier. With recent discussions among politicians in the United States to simply confiscate the Wikileaks website, this trend may be on the way. Time will only show more such examples.