Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to clarify how many removal requests are made, how often, and who makes these requests, as well as which websites are reported to search engines so they can be removed from the search results.
Design/methodology/approach
Undertakes a deep analysis of more than 3.2bn removed pages from Google’s search results requested by reporting organizations from 2011 to 2018 and over 460m removed pages from Bing’s search results requested by reporting organizations from 2015 to 2017. The paper focuses on pages that belong to the .pl country coded top-level domain (ccTLD).
Findings
Although the number of requests to remove data from search results has been growing year on year, fewer URLs have been reported in recent years. Some of the requests are, however, unjustified and are rejected by teams representing the search engines. In terms of reporting copyright violations, one company in particular stands out (AudioLock.Net), accounting for 28.1 percent of all reports sent to Google (the top ten companies combined were responsible for 61.3 percent of the total number of reports).
Research limitations/implications
As not every request can be published, the study is based only what is publicly available. Also, the data assigned to Poland is only based on the ccTLD domain name (.pl); other domain extensions for Polish internet users were not considered.
Originality/value
This is first global analysis of data from transparency reports published by search engine companies as prior research has been based on specific notices.
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Information Systems
Reference39 articles.
1. Allgrove, B. and Ganley, P. (2007), “Search engines, data aggregators and UK copyright law: a proposal”, working paper, Baker & McKenzie LLP, London, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.961797
2. Google is not fun: an investigation of how Swedish teenagers frame online searching;Journal of Documentation,2017
3. Bifet, A., Castillo, C., Chirita, P.A. and Weber, I. (2005), “An analysis of factors used in search engine ranking”, paper presented at the 1st International Workshop on Adversarial Information Retrieval on the Web (AIRWeb), Chiba, available at: http://airweb.cse.lehigh.edu/2005/bifet.pdf (accessed April 15, 2018).
4. Bridy, A. (2016), “Copyright’s digital deputies: DMCA-Plus enforcement by Internet intermediaries”, in Rothchild, J.A. (Ed.), Research Handbook On Electronic Commerce Law, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, pp. 185-210, available at: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783479924.00021
5. Fortifying the safe harbors: reevaluating the DMCA in a Web 2.0 world;Berkeley Technology Law Journal,2008
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献