I’ve run Higher Plain Music, creating my content without any guests, ads, or support since 2008. During that time, I’ve had a couple of artists reach out to me to have some content removed or unpublished for a set period of time when a release is being repackaged, or an artist is changing name, for example, and I’ve complied. Last week, I received my first-ever DMCA notice, and it sent me down a bit of a rabbit hole. The result has left me pondering the state of reviews and independent journalism.
The initial problem
In 2022, I wrote a short book review for John Koenig’s ‘The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows‘. It is a delightful book, and one I treasure. I gave it a very biased 10/10 score because every time I read it, I discover something awesome. It was not a well-read post, gathering a mere 204 organic search views and about a thousand email notification reads. Flash forward to last week, and I received the following email from Google, informing me that my site allegedly infringes upon the copyrights of others.
After initially assuming this was spam, I researched the site separately to find out that this seemed to be a genuine claim. In the age of AI slop and the disgraceful undermining of copyrighted works in the pursuit of AI snake oil, I found it quite ironic. I also champion independent music, games, and art, whilst creating my own using my own (often lack of) talent. To be clear, this isn’t a DMCA takedown notice, which forces you to remove content from the internet. It is explained that your content will be scrubbed and removed from any Google search results. That effectively means no one outside of established readers of your website could ever find it, and that’s not ideal. So… I took to Lumen to see what was there, and was initially greeted with a “Notice Rescinded” message.
Perhaps it was an error, so I searched all the notices for anything relating to my content to check, and there it was, a notice in all its glory, and with the ability to see more information blocked despite using the email address the notice was sent to, to confirm everything was ok.
The key part of the description for me is the “any formats, including PDF, summaries, audiobooks, and others, produced without authorization will constitute a copyright infringement”. It is the “summaries” and “others” that are particularly vague and open to interpretation. Is that a book summary app like Blinkist that summarises books, probably ruining the experience in my grumpy, humble opinion? An AI summary that Google (often inaccurately) places in search? What on Earth is an “other”? I’d have thought it might mean merch, or repurposing of content, but Simon & Schuster seems to be taking this vagueness to remove every single review of this book, and many others, from search engines. Bing has about 2 reviews left. Google has a few more, but my content is already missing, although another post appears that references it. Aside from some approved press snippets and some review website juggernauts where you can buy the book, many reviews seem to be missing.
Simon & Schuster has placed thousands upon thousands of claims into Google to remove content, stating the content infringes copyright. I got bored scanning the pages, but whenever I investigated them, a large portion of them seemed to be reviews.
Simon & Schuster – are they anti-review?
I began to search for the individual websites mentioned in each DMCA which related to this specific book. None of the content appears on Google, but the content itself does still exist, and I could find it using the individual site searches. I read a sample of 10, and all of them appear to be written in their own voice, using their own words, and all of them are positively praising the book. Yet Simon & Schuster does not want the public to see them, and I don’t understand why.
Is this just an overzealous control of a narrative? Is this AI DMCA detection going haywire, much like the YouTube copyright claim hellfire that exists today? The biggest question for me is, does Simon & Schuster think that reviewing their publications is a copyright infringement, because we use the title, or summarise what the book may be about? If any of those questions are true, I think it is the latest in an insidious culture to use the size of powerful companies to squash the little guy. It is also insulting to their user base, who should be able to investigate different perspectives and viewpoints on a purchase. This could even prevent discussions amongst fans, and it certainly limits reach. My post may have only got 1,200 eyeballs on it, but that may have generated a few sales for them. If they won’t treat my individual, unique content with respect, then I will no longer purchase or participate with theirs.
What happens when you try to say this is a mistake? Welcome to Google’s extremely legal and anti-creatives stance. You are guilty until proven innocent, just like YouTube claims. I am the owner of the content as I wrote the article. It’s legally binding, and immediately the emails and forms want you to prep solicitors and get legal fees ready. It is escalated from zero to a hundred without any nuance. I understand and empathise with Google on this front as they must be getting thousands of content reports per second. This is digital red tape and bureaucracy, and it will only get worse as AI automation is given increased leeway to make decisions. I hate it. I’m made to feel like a criminal, and I’ve done nothing but write an article to say “buy this book”.
As the little independent one-man band, I’ll see what happens after I’ve submitted this report. I’ve done it before for a YouTube video of a game review where I was unfavourable, and the publisher wanted the video removed. I won that one, I assume I’ll win this. It is all just so heavy-handed.
Why does this matter?
Most entertainment websites are now owned by just a few companies. This means that truly independent websites and creators are being constantly squeezed and pressured to follow a homogenous approach. These companies often steal and repurpose content using generative AI, and that floods the search results with empty sites devoid of personality or accurate information. The quality of our information is degrading fast, and publishers seem to want control of what’s left. Often, this comes down to blanket DMCA requests, like this one from Simon & Schuster that grossly overstep the line. They are designed to threaten, intimidate, and drain you of your resources. Sometimes, you’ll be expected to lawyer up at your cost, or just accept your fate. They’ve got millions. I’ve got a new air freshener for my toilet. We aren’t the same, and these practices feel geared in a way to keep it that way.
These copyright systems are archaic, judgmental, and cannot cope with any level of human review or interaction. Speaking to anyone at Google or Simon & Schuster is futile, as they don’t respond. I will never review another product from Simon & Schuster again. They might release something amazing in the future, but I refuse to write about it. They have made it too risky. If you’ve been slammed for one rogue DMCA takedown, it starts to impact your stats on web traffic. This is a signal for search engines and where you are placed in results for other things. Your website is then perceived as weaker and potentially untrustworthy. Suddenly, you aren’t on the first few pages of a result anymore, and users rarely wander beyond the first few results as it is. There is too much getting in the way that controls what information is presented to you. It should be your choice whether or not you click on something, and you should have access to all the information online to make an informed choice.
I’ll update further when this reaches the next milestone on the journey. What an awful anti-consumer, anti-information practice…
Support Higher Plain Music
Higher Plain Music is part of the Higher Plain Network – a one-man indie media project. If you like what I do, please consider supporting me via Patreon for as little as $1/£1 a month. In return, you’ll receive additional perks for supporting me, such as behind-the-scenes content and free downloads. You can also donate using PayPal. Sharing the website helps too or using the affiliate buy now links on reviews. I receive a few pence per Amazon sale. All your support will enable me to produce better content, more often. I’d love to make this a full-time media network and your support can make that happen. Thank you.
Discover more from Higher Plain Music
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
