ADVERTISEMENT

It seems the Motion Picture Association of America has indeed been playing hardball over all this piracy nonsense. Documents & emails obtained from a discussion (circa 2013) to aggressively reduce piracy show that the MPAA and a small selection of attorneys general (Wikipedia) were prepared to go through any means necessary to get the attention of search engines that occasionally return links to pirated content. Google, being the behemoth it is, ended up being their primary target.

ADVERTISEMENT

What can be gleaned from the documents & emails shows that Google likely wasn’t doing its part to remove links to pirated content (at least, it wasn’t doing a good job by MPAA standards). Upon realization that the search & advertising giant hadn’t quite gotten with the program, and with the knowledge that Google sees quite a bit of traffic from users of all types (including users with a penchant for questionably-obtained content), it seems some ideas were tossed around on how to get Google’s attention A.S.A.P.

The end result of that brainstorm? A list (with bullet points) of ways to paint Google as a facilitator of illegal activity beyond mere pirating. One of the points indicates that the MPAA + applicable attorneys general were ready to set up demos wherein Google advertised prescription painkillers, or helped in the illegal procurement of firearms. Next up? Claiming unfair trade practices (which would allege that autocomplete suggestions, as well as the order of results in a search, would be skewed toward products from Google affiliates in an otherwise undisclosed manner).

Given that these steps only indicate mere research, where would the results of the slander go? Well, these presentations of the slanderous information were to be displayed at a meeting of the National Association of Attorneys General — meaning, they were ready to make this a multi-state dustup if not a full-blown federal issue wherein Google would have to defend itself against incriminating evidence.

ADVERTISEMENT

But just in case that meeting was to return lukewarm results, further steps in the multi-step plan indicate that they were ready to start an all-out PR nightmare for The Goog. The false information would be chewed up & regurgitated by a PR firm; the PR firm would be hired by an allegedly unlinked entity to hide the true source of the misinformation. The firm would regurgitate the info to as many news outlets as would listen, with an intent to bring it to the attention of the Today Show (one of the top shows for disseminating news about the U.S. and select world issues which affect the U.S., as well as a show meant to showcase cute puppies, dance moves, and how to make fancy salsa for your next family reunion). The Today Show would then allow an investor or two to come on and question Google’s practices, which would send other investors into a tizzy.

But wait! There’s more! The investors who didn’t get the memo from that part of the debacle would then be able to look at the Wall Street Journal. Yep, they planned to help shuttle the information along to one of the top sources for U.S. stock trading news.

Let it sink in. Google, like any company of its size, is driven by a need for money. These folks were planning an entire campaign to put that potential capital in question.

Strong-arm tactics. The company frequently claimed to be a bully (after all, the “Don’t Be Evil” mantra no longer exists) was itself about to be bullied into complying.

All over pirated content not being taken down and hidden quickly enough.

Really?

And we know that some of these tactics eventually played out, if not due to the MPAA and the attorneys general. We know now (2 years after the fact) that Google has increased its responsiveness & efforts when it comes to curtailing piracy in its search results. Maybe the efforts worked!

Not unlike the information we learned from the Sony hack some time back, we’ve learned again that a group widely thought to be scummy has turned out to be even more scummy than previously imagined. They do it so effortlessly. Take a look at the emails (PDF) and tell me they didn’t sound like conversations you could have in nearly any professional setting. That jargon? That lingo? The indirect way of saying “Get on this now; we’ve been waiting for quite some time”? But I digress.

It would be wonderful to find out this was all a planted story, made in an attempt to follow which news outlets would latch on & keep a watch on them. I sadly don’t believe that’s the case.

h/t: TorrentFreak (English) & heise online (German). (thanks to Torsten and Kerry for bringing this up & providing sources)

What are your thoughts on all this? Can things get any worse? Is there even any reason for the MPAA to be so aggressive at fighting? Couldn’t they just ask nicely? Why is a group of attorneys general called NAAG?