1 00:00:04,440 --> 00:00:12,319 Speaker 1: Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from iHeartRadio. Hey there, 2 00:00:12,320 --> 00:00:15,760 Speaker 1: and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. 3 00:00:15,840 --> 00:00:19,520 Speaker 1: I'm an executive producer with iHeart Podcasts and how the 4 00:00:19,640 --> 00:00:23,160 Speaker 1: tech are You? So I may have told this story 5 00:00:23,400 --> 00:00:25,759 Speaker 1: on tech stuff before, but if I had, it was 6 00:00:25,840 --> 00:00:28,680 Speaker 1: years ago, because that's when it happened. So a friend 7 00:00:28,720 --> 00:00:32,040 Speaker 1: of mine was in a job search and they were 8 00:00:32,159 --> 00:00:35,080 Speaker 1: unhappy in their current work situation at the time. They 9 00:00:35,080 --> 00:00:37,760 Speaker 1: wanted to find something with a better company that better 10 00:00:37,880 --> 00:00:41,120 Speaker 1: utilized their skills and knowledge and didn't make them feel 11 00:00:41,159 --> 00:00:42,960 Speaker 1: like crying at the end of every day, and so 12 00:00:43,040 --> 00:00:47,440 Speaker 1: they started looking online for various opportunities. They used LinkedIn 13 00:00:47,680 --> 00:00:49,839 Speaker 1: and some other tools to try and find something that 14 00:00:49,960 --> 00:00:54,760 Speaker 1: was stable and appealing basics for a job search right well. 15 00:00:54,800 --> 00:00:58,680 Speaker 1: Along that search, they encountered some scam artists and predators. 16 00:00:59,040 --> 00:01:01,760 Speaker 1: So my friend would sometimes ask my opinion of some 17 00:01:01,880 --> 00:01:04,720 Speaker 1: of the responses that they received. They would send me 18 00:01:04,760 --> 00:01:06,360 Speaker 1: on a little bit of a hunt to find out 19 00:01:06,920 --> 00:01:10,640 Speaker 1: is this a legitimate offer or is this company doing 20 00:01:10,680 --> 00:01:14,000 Speaker 1: something shady and underhanded. They were worried that some of 21 00:01:14,000 --> 00:01:16,120 Speaker 1: the responses they got were a bit too good to 22 00:01:16,200 --> 00:01:18,880 Speaker 1: be true. So I looked into it, and often they 23 00:01:18,880 --> 00:01:21,120 Speaker 1: were too good to be true. And I'm sure a 24 00:01:21,120 --> 00:01:24,720 Speaker 1: lot of you out there are familiar with similar scams, right, 25 00:01:24,760 --> 00:01:28,919 Speaker 1: where someone gets offered one position, when they go into 26 00:01:28,959 --> 00:01:33,160 Speaker 1: interview for it, they are offered something totally different. Right. 27 00:01:33,240 --> 00:01:35,840 Speaker 1: It's a bait and switch, where it's a different position 28 00:01:35,920 --> 00:01:38,760 Speaker 1: with different pay. They're not going to get nearly the 29 00:01:38,840 --> 00:01:42,920 Speaker 1: stuff that they had been promised or suggested through the 30 00:01:42,920 --> 00:01:46,760 Speaker 1: whole job search situation. That sort of stuff, unfortunately, is 31 00:01:47,480 --> 00:01:52,800 Speaker 1: terribly common and it's really crappy. So often when I 32 00:01:52,840 --> 00:01:55,880 Speaker 1: would look into these offers that my friend was getting, 33 00:01:55,960 --> 00:01:59,000 Speaker 1: I would find that they frequently linked to a website that, 34 00:01:59,080 --> 00:02:04,360 Speaker 1: at least on a very casual surface glance, looks somewhat legitimate. 35 00:02:04,800 --> 00:02:08,840 Speaker 1: But even just a cursory look at the site, especially 36 00:02:08,840 --> 00:02:11,840 Speaker 1: clicking around a little bit to the different pages in 37 00:02:11,880 --> 00:02:14,240 Speaker 1: the site, would reveal that the whole thing was just 38 00:02:14,280 --> 00:02:16,880 Speaker 1: a facade. I remember one supposed I think it was 39 00:02:16,919 --> 00:02:19,720 Speaker 1: a real estate company that was offering my friend an 40 00:02:19,840 --> 00:02:24,040 Speaker 1: incredible starting position and salary. And when I went to 41 00:02:24,040 --> 00:02:26,959 Speaker 1: the website, the website did look pretty slick, The office 42 00:02:27,000 --> 00:02:29,920 Speaker 1: space looked really nice, the folks, and the photos looked 43 00:02:29,960 --> 00:02:34,680 Speaker 1: really photogenic, and immediately I thought something was fishy. For 44 00:02:34,760 --> 00:02:37,840 Speaker 1: one thing, like me, my friend is based in the 45 00:02:37,880 --> 00:02:41,680 Speaker 1: metropolitan Atlanta area, and yet the building that I saw 46 00:02:41,800 --> 00:02:45,559 Speaker 1: on the website didn't look like it was in Atlanta, 47 00:02:45,600 --> 00:02:49,640 Speaker 1: even though there was an Atlanta address that was on 48 00:02:49,680 --> 00:02:53,800 Speaker 1: the website. Now you could argue, well, maybe it's in 49 00:02:53,840 --> 00:02:56,080 Speaker 1: a part of Atlanta I'm just not familiar with, or 50 00:02:56,200 --> 00:02:59,400 Speaker 1: maybe this was a company that has offices in different 51 00:02:59,400 --> 00:03:01,560 Speaker 1: cities and what I was really looking at was an 52 00:03:01,680 --> 00:03:04,880 Speaker 1: HQ building in some other city or something. But I 53 00:03:05,000 --> 00:03:06,800 Speaker 1: used the address that was listed on the site to 54 00:03:06,840 --> 00:03:09,680 Speaker 1: look up the location online, you know, get a street 55 00:03:09,760 --> 00:03:13,840 Speaker 1: view look at this supposed place, and not only did 56 00:03:13,840 --> 00:03:17,920 Speaker 1: the building look totally different, there were no businesses matching 57 00:03:18,160 --> 00:03:20,799 Speaker 1: the name of the one that was contacting my friend 58 00:03:21,040 --> 00:03:23,639 Speaker 1: at that particular building location. I was able to find 59 00:03:23,960 --> 00:03:26,840 Speaker 1: the businesses that were in that building, and none of 60 00:03:26,880 --> 00:03:29,000 Speaker 1: them matched the thing that was sent to my friend. 61 00:03:29,320 --> 00:03:31,600 Speaker 1: So then go back to the website to click around 62 00:03:31,600 --> 00:03:33,640 Speaker 1: some more. I find that some of the links, like 63 00:03:33,880 --> 00:03:37,160 Speaker 1: links to bios for the leadership team or whatever, led 64 00:03:37,200 --> 00:03:41,040 Speaker 1: to unfinished pages. I just had stuff like lorum ipsum 65 00:03:41,160 --> 00:03:44,160 Speaker 1: style gibberish in them. So the more I looked, the 66 00:03:44,200 --> 00:03:47,720 Speaker 1: more it appeared to be just a hastily assembled trap 67 00:03:48,000 --> 00:03:52,080 Speaker 1: designed to lure hopeful people into taking the bait. Now 68 00:03:52,160 --> 00:03:54,400 Speaker 1: what the scam was, I don't know, Like, I don't 69 00:03:54,440 --> 00:03:56,000 Speaker 1: know if it was going to be a bait and switch. 70 00:03:56,200 --> 00:03:58,320 Speaker 1: I don't know, if it was really some other company 71 00:03:58,360 --> 00:04:00,800 Speaker 1: that was just looking to get you know, cheap labor. 72 00:04:01,120 --> 00:04:03,240 Speaker 1: I don't know if it was like a phishing attempt 73 00:04:03,240 --> 00:04:07,200 Speaker 1: to get my friend's personal information. That doesn't really matter. 74 00:04:07,280 --> 00:04:10,480 Speaker 1: What was clear was that there was something shady happening. 75 00:04:10,760 --> 00:04:13,040 Speaker 1: The real clincher was when I did a reverse image 76 00:04:13,080 --> 00:04:15,280 Speaker 1: search on some of the photos that were in the page, 77 00:04:15,680 --> 00:04:19,400 Speaker 1: because some of the reverse images went to stock photography sites, 78 00:04:19,400 --> 00:04:25,039 Speaker 1: but others linked to identical websites that had businesses with 79 00:04:25,120 --> 00:04:30,240 Speaker 1: different names in different cities, but otherwise the website was identical, 80 00:04:30,440 --> 00:04:33,839 Speaker 1: with the same language and everything, to the point where 81 00:04:33,880 --> 00:04:37,440 Speaker 1: the same mistakes were showing up on some of these pages. 82 00:04:37,839 --> 00:04:40,680 Speaker 1: And clearly this was just a scam that was being 83 00:04:40,760 --> 00:04:44,160 Speaker 1: run over and over and over again in different locations. 84 00:04:44,480 --> 00:04:47,360 Speaker 1: So I warned my friend, and I also got very, 85 00:04:47,480 --> 00:04:51,840 Speaker 1: very very angry about the scam. Now, I hate scams 86 00:04:52,080 --> 00:04:55,960 Speaker 1: and cons and deceit, but I really hate the ones 87 00:04:56,240 --> 00:04:58,760 Speaker 1: that prey upon people who have the most to lose. 88 00:04:58,920 --> 00:05:01,400 Speaker 1: If you're going to scam the billionaire out of a 89 00:05:01,480 --> 00:05:04,680 Speaker 1: million dollars, I mean, what you're doing is wrong, but 90 00:05:04,720 --> 00:05:07,800 Speaker 1: I'm not gonna be sad for the billionaire. But if 91 00:05:07,800 --> 00:05:11,480 Speaker 1: you're scamming people who are trying to make a positive 92 00:05:11,520 --> 00:05:14,800 Speaker 1: change in their lives because they're currently in a bad situation, 93 00:05:15,160 --> 00:05:18,920 Speaker 1: that's just the worst. Now, from the con artist viewpoint, 94 00:05:18,960 --> 00:05:21,480 Speaker 1: I totally get it, because you want to target people 95 00:05:21,520 --> 00:05:24,760 Speaker 1: who are already highly motivated to buy into whatever it 96 00:05:24,839 --> 00:05:27,240 Speaker 1: is you're selling. But when you consider the people who 97 00:05:27,279 --> 00:05:29,480 Speaker 1: are typically looking for a job or in a situation 98 00:05:29,560 --> 00:05:32,240 Speaker 1: that is already pretty tough, and then on top of 99 00:05:32,279 --> 00:05:34,760 Speaker 1: that you throw a scam at them, that just makes 100 00:05:34,800 --> 00:05:38,920 Speaker 1: my blood boil. So why did I bother telling this story. Well, 101 00:05:38,920 --> 00:05:42,960 Speaker 1: it's because there's a similar scam that I read about today, 102 00:05:43,360 --> 00:05:45,640 Speaker 1: and I didn't know about it untill I saw an 103 00:05:45,760 --> 00:05:48,920 Speaker 1: article by Kevin Purdy on Ours Technica. Y'all know I 104 00:05:48,960 --> 00:05:51,599 Speaker 1: love Ours Technica. I don't have any connection to the website, 105 00:05:51,640 --> 00:05:54,359 Speaker 1: but I love their work. And the article is titled 106 00:05:54,680 --> 00:05:58,960 Speaker 1: fake AI law firms are sending fake DMCA threats to 107 00:05:59,000 --> 00:06:03,279 Speaker 1: generate fake SEO games, which is a heck of a title. 108 00:06:03,520 --> 00:06:06,960 Speaker 1: And yeah, this con game gets a bit convoluted. It 109 00:06:07,000 --> 00:06:10,520 Speaker 1: starts to make me think of some of those films 110 00:06:10,600 --> 00:06:13,240 Speaker 1: like that you would see, especially around the nineties and 111 00:06:13,279 --> 00:06:17,040 Speaker 1: two thousands, of like these scams that would be scams 112 00:06:17,040 --> 00:06:19,960 Speaker 1: on top of scams on top of scams, where following 113 00:06:20,000 --> 00:06:22,919 Speaker 1: it starts to get a little challenging. It's similar in 114 00:06:23,000 --> 00:06:26,279 Speaker 1: that way. So let's give you a little scenario that's 115 00:06:26,360 --> 00:06:29,240 Speaker 1: kind of an analogous to what we're talking about. Imagine 116 00:06:29,240 --> 00:06:31,960 Speaker 1: that one day you go out and you check your 117 00:06:32,000 --> 00:06:34,880 Speaker 1: mail because sometimes you still get stuff in the mail, 118 00:06:35,360 --> 00:06:38,680 Speaker 1: and you find out there's a notice that's included in 119 00:06:38,720 --> 00:06:41,279 Speaker 1: your mail that day, and the notice claims that you 120 00:06:41,320 --> 00:06:44,599 Speaker 1: are under investigation for a supposed crime that you have 121 00:06:44,680 --> 00:06:47,720 Speaker 1: committed against a person you have never heard of. What's 122 00:06:47,839 --> 00:06:50,760 Speaker 1: even more strange is that this notice is coming from 123 00:06:50,839 --> 00:06:53,479 Speaker 1: a police department that has a weird name. It doesn't 124 00:06:53,680 --> 00:06:56,000 Speaker 1: match the one that's actually in your area. It seems 125 00:06:56,080 --> 00:06:58,720 Speaker 1: kind of odd, so you decide, you know what, I'm 126 00:06:58,720 --> 00:07:01,240 Speaker 1: going to look into this, and you look up that 127 00:07:01,279 --> 00:07:03,760 Speaker 1: police department and you find out there's no police force 128 00:07:03,839 --> 00:07:07,640 Speaker 1: in your city that has that name. Then you look 129 00:07:07,680 --> 00:07:10,440 Speaker 1: and you find out there's not any person by the 130 00:07:10,520 --> 00:07:13,760 Speaker 1: name of the supposed victim that you can find anyway. 131 00:07:14,200 --> 00:07:17,000 Speaker 1: You would think that was really strange, right. That's kind 132 00:07:17,000 --> 00:07:20,480 Speaker 1: of how the scam we're going to talk about worked, 133 00:07:20,760 --> 00:07:23,400 Speaker 1: and not that it worked. It didn't work because the 134 00:07:23,440 --> 00:07:25,480 Speaker 1: person they sent it to was far too smart for this. 135 00:07:25,920 --> 00:07:29,200 Speaker 1: But we'll also talk about why the scam exists in 136 00:07:29,240 --> 00:07:32,000 Speaker 1: the first place later on in the show, because it 137 00:07:32,080 --> 00:07:35,600 Speaker 1: wasn't just to you know, phish information or get money. 138 00:07:35,640 --> 00:07:37,920 Speaker 1: In fact, that wasn't the key to it at all. 139 00:07:38,360 --> 00:07:42,360 Speaker 1: The article covers the story of a journalist named Ernie Smith, 140 00:07:43,560 --> 00:07:46,600 Speaker 1: so not the musician or producer or anything. It's the 141 00:07:46,680 --> 00:07:50,880 Speaker 1: journalist Ernie Smith, and Smith author is a newsletter called Tedium, 142 00:07:51,280 --> 00:07:54,960 Speaker 1: which is a nice little fun way of piggybacking on medium, 143 00:07:55,000 --> 00:07:58,800 Speaker 1: I guess, or at least like kind of slyly acknowledging 144 00:07:58,880 --> 00:08:02,560 Speaker 1: medium with your own. I gotta admit, that's exactly the 145 00:08:02,600 --> 00:08:04,200 Speaker 1: sort of name I would have picked if I were 146 00:08:04,240 --> 00:08:06,880 Speaker 1: writing a newsletter I will say that, based upon what 147 00:08:06,920 --> 00:08:09,680 Speaker 1: I've seen of the newsletter, which I've just subscribed to it, 148 00:08:09,720 --> 00:08:13,280 Speaker 1: because again I was unfamiliar with Smith's work until I 149 00:08:13,320 --> 00:08:15,600 Speaker 1: read this article, I will say that, based upon what 150 00:08:15,640 --> 00:08:18,960 Speaker 1: I've seen, it's well worth checking out. He does cover technology, 151 00:08:19,080 --> 00:08:21,760 Speaker 1: but he also has articles on lots of other stuff, 152 00:08:22,120 --> 00:08:24,960 Speaker 1: like Neapolitan ice cream and its role in the space industry. 153 00:08:25,480 --> 00:08:28,120 Speaker 1: It seems like a cool dude. So anyway, Smith will 154 00:08:28,160 --> 00:08:32,400 Speaker 1: often use images in his newsletter, which is pretty standard online, 155 00:08:32,640 --> 00:08:36,520 Speaker 1: and he makes sure to source those images appropriately and 156 00:08:36,559 --> 00:08:39,520 Speaker 1: then to credit those sources, as is very much not 157 00:08:39,960 --> 00:08:43,679 Speaker 1: standard online. I don't have to tell y'all that tons 158 00:08:43,720 --> 00:08:45,880 Speaker 1: of folks out there on the web will just grab 159 00:08:45,960 --> 00:08:49,320 Speaker 1: whatever images they can just doing an image search. They 160 00:08:49,360 --> 00:08:51,640 Speaker 1: won't even spare a second thought about it. They'll PLoP 161 00:08:51,679 --> 00:08:55,080 Speaker 1: it into their own stuff. So technically, this is what 162 00:08:55,120 --> 00:08:59,000 Speaker 1: we would call stealing, and it's been explained to me 163 00:08:59,160 --> 00:09:03,800 Speaker 1: a society only frowns upon it. So for that reason, 164 00:09:03,840 --> 00:09:07,120 Speaker 1: we've got things like stock photography databases, and you can 165 00:09:07,200 --> 00:09:11,160 Speaker 1: access these typically you access them for a fee, and 166 00:09:11,200 --> 00:09:13,240 Speaker 1: then you can get images that you can include with 167 00:09:13,320 --> 00:09:15,800 Speaker 1: all the permissions that you need to do so, the 168 00:09:15,840 --> 00:09:18,920 Speaker 1: most rule abiding creators out there will go to that 169 00:09:19,000 --> 00:09:23,120 Speaker 1: kind of trouble. Everybody else steals. Now, a lot of 170 00:09:23,120 --> 00:09:26,040 Speaker 1: people will steal until they get a DMCA notice, and 171 00:09:26,080 --> 00:09:29,199 Speaker 1: that scares the stealing right out of them. Now, the 172 00:09:29,280 --> 00:09:33,400 Speaker 1: DMCA is the good old Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 173 00:09:33,480 --> 00:09:36,439 Speaker 1: nineteen ninety eight here in the United States, and here 174 00:09:36,440 --> 00:09:39,240 Speaker 1: in the US copyright law has gone through quite a 175 00:09:39,280 --> 00:09:44,120 Speaker 1: few revisions over its history. Now we can just oversimplify 176 00:09:44,240 --> 00:09:49,280 Speaker 1: that whole history by saying that typically large media companies 177 00:09:49,400 --> 00:09:54,079 Speaker 1: like Disney have lobbied big time, really again and again 178 00:09:54,120 --> 00:09:58,880 Speaker 1: in order to extend copyright protections for longer and longer periods, 179 00:09:59,120 --> 00:10:02,199 Speaker 1: and this lets them maintain an exclusive grip on certain 180 00:10:02,240 --> 00:10:06,760 Speaker 1: ip You probably have heard that the Steamboat Willy version 181 00:10:06,920 --> 00:10:10,120 Speaker 1: of Mickey Mouse is now in public domain. That's true. 182 00:10:10,200 --> 00:10:13,080 Speaker 1: It's the only version of Mickey Mouse that's currently in 183 00:10:13,120 --> 00:10:16,360 Speaker 1: public domain. Other versions will enter into public domain as 184 00:10:16,440 --> 00:10:19,160 Speaker 1: time goes on. But it doesn't mean that every version 185 00:10:19,440 --> 00:10:22,880 Speaker 1: of Mickey Mouse is in public domain. And the reason 186 00:10:22,920 --> 00:10:24,920 Speaker 1: it took so long to get to the point where 187 00:10:25,400 --> 00:10:28,280 Speaker 1: the Steamboat Willi version would enter public domain is because 188 00:10:28,280 --> 00:10:32,000 Speaker 1: companies like Disney would lobby very hard to get legislation 189 00:10:32,200 --> 00:10:37,920 Speaker 1: passed to extend copyright protection beyond what it was running 190 00:10:38,000 --> 00:10:41,280 Speaker 1: up against. Well, eventually we kind of hit the limit 191 00:10:41,360 --> 00:10:43,880 Speaker 1: on that and everyone said, you know what, I think 192 00:10:43,880 --> 00:10:45,960 Speaker 1: we pushed this as far as we can and so 193 00:10:46,760 --> 00:10:50,079 Speaker 1: now we're not seeing that happen quite as much. Now. 194 00:10:50,120 --> 00:10:52,640 Speaker 1: A lot more stuff has been added into copyright law 195 00:10:52,760 --> 00:10:56,560 Speaker 1: besides just making it longer, and that particularly became true 196 00:10:56,640 --> 00:10:59,360 Speaker 1: upon the dawn of the World Wide Web. So remember 197 00:10:59,559 --> 00:11:03,280 Speaker 1: DMC gets passed in nineteen ninety eight. That's when the 198 00:11:03,840 --> 00:11:06,400 Speaker 1: Web was maturing. It had yet to go through the 199 00:11:06,440 --> 00:11:11,280 Speaker 1: Dot Com crash, but like it was definitely a big factor. 200 00:11:11,640 --> 00:11:15,040 Speaker 1: So the DMCA introduced quite a few new concepts into 201 00:11:15,040 --> 00:11:18,679 Speaker 1: copyright law. So, for example, there's the paradoxical nature of 202 00:11:18,760 --> 00:11:24,280 Speaker 1: digital rights management or DRM. So with US copyright law, 203 00:11:24,320 --> 00:11:29,400 Speaker 1: we have this concept of fair use. There are exemptions 204 00:11:29,440 --> 00:11:32,880 Speaker 1: of copyright in which it is fair to use copyrighted 205 00:11:32,880 --> 00:11:35,320 Speaker 1: material that does not belong to you, but they are 206 00:11:35,440 --> 00:11:37,800 Speaker 1: very specific and it only comes up when you are 207 00:11:37,840 --> 00:11:40,800 Speaker 1: actually defending yourself in a court case. It's not something 208 00:11:40,840 --> 00:11:44,800 Speaker 1: you can proactively put out there anyway. One of the 209 00:11:44,800 --> 00:11:47,959 Speaker 1: concepts of fair use. Is that it is totally legal 210 00:11:48,240 --> 00:11:51,440 Speaker 1: for someone to purchase a copy of something like an 211 00:11:51,480 --> 00:11:54,280 Speaker 1: album or a piece of software or whatever it might be, 212 00:11:54,679 --> 00:11:57,520 Speaker 1: is totally legal to make a copy of that thing 213 00:11:58,000 --> 00:12:01,640 Speaker 1: for the purposes of a personal back That's completely within 214 00:12:01,679 --> 00:12:06,120 Speaker 1: the rights of citizens, which seems pretty straightforward. But certain 215 00:12:06,200 --> 00:12:10,120 Speaker 1: companies will use DRM protections that make it difficult or 216 00:12:10,160 --> 00:12:13,800 Speaker 1: impossible to make a copy of their stuff unless you 217 00:12:13,880 --> 00:12:16,840 Speaker 1: first strip out the DRM. But if you were to 218 00:12:16,880 --> 00:12:20,360 Speaker 1: strip out the DRM, it makes the DRM moot. So 219 00:12:20,400 --> 00:12:24,839 Speaker 1: the DMCA says, hey, it's illegal to strip out DRM. 220 00:12:25,559 --> 00:12:28,920 Speaker 1: If in fact there is DRM on the stuff you buy. 221 00:12:29,280 --> 00:12:32,000 Speaker 1: That means that, yeah, it's legal for you to make 222 00:12:32,000 --> 00:12:35,520 Speaker 1: a backup copy. However, DRM is preventing you from making 223 00:12:35,520 --> 00:12:38,520 Speaker 1: a copy at all, and it is illegal to remove 224 00:12:38,559 --> 00:12:41,480 Speaker 1: the DRM. So by extension, you're legally allowed to make 225 00:12:41,480 --> 00:12:45,439 Speaker 1: a copy, but technically you can't because laws are fun 226 00:12:45,559 --> 00:12:48,760 Speaker 1: and fair and it makes sense, all right, I'm getting 227 00:12:48,800 --> 00:12:52,559 Speaker 1: way off track here. So the DMCA also includes processes 228 00:12:52,559 --> 00:12:56,880 Speaker 1: for sending takedown notices, and this, again on the high level, 229 00:12:56,920 --> 00:12:59,520 Speaker 1: is pretty straightforward, at least if you assume that the 230 00:12:59,559 --> 00:13:02,880 Speaker 1: party that sending the takedown notice actually has the authority 231 00:13:02,920 --> 00:13:05,840 Speaker 1: to do it. So basically, it goes like this. Let's 232 00:13:05,840 --> 00:13:09,240 Speaker 1: say that you are the creator of some kind of content. 233 00:13:09,400 --> 00:13:12,160 Speaker 1: Might be a photograph, that might be music, it might 234 00:13:12,200 --> 00:13:15,160 Speaker 1: be writing, whatever it is. You hold the copyright for 235 00:13:15,240 --> 00:13:17,720 Speaker 1: this content, or maybe you don't. Maybe you didn't actually 236 00:13:17,760 --> 00:13:21,280 Speaker 1: copyright it, you just created it. In fact, a copyright 237 00:13:21,320 --> 00:13:26,480 Speaker 1: is not necessarily required to send to a DMCA takedown notice. Now, 238 00:13:26,559 --> 00:13:28,560 Speaker 1: let's say that you find that someone else has made 239 00:13:28,640 --> 00:13:31,839 Speaker 1: use of your content without your permission. You have the 240 00:13:31,960 --> 00:13:35,559 Speaker 1: right to process a takedown notice against that someone else. 241 00:13:35,880 --> 00:13:38,760 Speaker 1: It's kind of like a cease and desist letter, and 242 00:13:38,840 --> 00:13:42,080 Speaker 1: it indicates that if someone else doesn't take down your material, 243 00:13:42,320 --> 00:13:45,559 Speaker 1: you could pursue a legal claim against them. So it's 244 00:13:45,640 --> 00:13:49,800 Speaker 1: kind of like the first step toward initiating a more 245 00:13:50,000 --> 00:13:56,440 Speaker 1: serious legal action against someone perpetrating copyright infringement. Okay, that's 246 00:13:56,480 --> 00:13:59,000 Speaker 1: a lot, and there's a bit more to it, but 247 00:13:59,200 --> 00:14:02,600 Speaker 1: we'll get more that after we come back from taking 248 00:14:02,679 --> 00:14:14,600 Speaker 1: a break to thank our sponsors. Okay, we're back. I 249 00:14:14,800 --> 00:14:19,120 Speaker 1: just described before the break the process of sending a 250 00:14:19,200 --> 00:14:23,520 Speaker 1: DMCA takedown notice to someone who's using material that does 251 00:14:23,560 --> 00:14:27,520 Speaker 1: not technically belong to them. So a DMCA notice has 252 00:14:27,720 --> 00:14:32,000 Speaker 1: several factors that the content creator or the creator's agent, 253 00:14:32,400 --> 00:14:36,120 Speaker 1: right whomever it is that's pursuing this DMCA takedown, they 254 00:14:36,120 --> 00:14:38,720 Speaker 1: have things that they need to include in their takedown 255 00:14:38,800 --> 00:14:41,240 Speaker 1: notice in order for it to actually be valid under 256 00:14:41,280 --> 00:14:45,480 Speaker 1: copyright law. You can't just send someone a handwritten note 257 00:14:45,520 --> 00:14:48,640 Speaker 1: on a bar napkin that says, hey, take down that picture. 258 00:14:48,680 --> 00:14:51,760 Speaker 1: You don't own it. I do. That's not enough. So 259 00:14:52,120 --> 00:14:54,840 Speaker 1: if the takedown notice is missing some of these elements, 260 00:14:54,880 --> 00:14:58,240 Speaker 1: then the entity that receives the notice can just refuse 261 00:14:58,280 --> 00:15:01,800 Speaker 1: it or not pay attention because the notice itself didn't 262 00:15:01,840 --> 00:15:04,520 Speaker 1: follow the law in the first place. It has to 263 00:15:04,560 --> 00:15:08,440 Speaker 1: follow the rules in order to apply. And typically when 264 00:15:08,440 --> 00:15:10,920 Speaker 1: we are talking about this, we're not actually talking about 265 00:15:11,160 --> 00:15:15,960 Speaker 1: the copyright holder sending a DMCA takedown directly to the 266 00:15:16,040 --> 00:15:20,280 Speaker 1: content creator that used that material. Instead, you're talking about 267 00:15:20,320 --> 00:15:23,160 Speaker 1: a notice that is sent to some sort of service 268 00:15:23,200 --> 00:15:27,760 Speaker 1: provider that is responsible for giving the content creator a platform. 269 00:15:27,880 --> 00:15:30,600 Speaker 1: This could be any kind of company, from an Internet 270 00:15:30,640 --> 00:15:35,040 Speaker 1: service provider to a web hosting service to a platform 271 00:15:35,120 --> 00:15:37,800 Speaker 1: like YouTube, and then the service acts as a kind 272 00:15:37,800 --> 00:15:41,800 Speaker 1: of liaison between the injured party, the copyright holder, and 273 00:15:41,840 --> 00:15:46,000 Speaker 1: whomever made inappropriate use of that material. This is why 274 00:15:46,080 --> 00:15:50,080 Speaker 1: platforms like YouTube are pretty lickety split when it comes 275 00:15:50,080 --> 00:15:54,200 Speaker 1: to responding to DMCA takedown notices. YouTube has a history 276 00:15:54,200 --> 00:15:57,760 Speaker 1: of acting very quickly in this regard because YouTube slash 277 00:15:58,000 --> 00:16:01,760 Speaker 1: Google slash alphabet doesn't want to be held legally accountable 278 00:16:01,800 --> 00:16:06,160 Speaker 1: for allowing copyright infringement on the platform. This dates back 279 00:16:06,200 --> 00:16:09,480 Speaker 1: to the very early days of YouTube, and YouTube doesn't 280 00:16:09,560 --> 00:16:13,080 Speaker 1: exactly have the desire or the ability to spend the 281 00:16:13,120 --> 00:16:16,000 Speaker 1: money in time it would take to investigate every single 282 00:16:16,080 --> 00:16:19,600 Speaker 1: DMCA claim to make sure that it's a legitimate claim. 283 00:16:19,680 --> 00:16:23,680 Speaker 1: So often you will hear stories from YouTube creators who say, yeah, 284 00:16:23,800 --> 00:16:26,800 Speaker 1: I got a DMCA takedown notice, but the company that 285 00:16:27,080 --> 00:16:30,280 Speaker 1: issued it doesn't even own the material that I used. Like, 286 00:16:30,320 --> 00:16:33,600 Speaker 1: there's some crazy stories out there, and in fact, a 287 00:16:33,640 --> 00:16:37,400 Speaker 1: lot of people have weaponized DMCA takedown notices in an 288 00:16:37,400 --> 00:16:41,000 Speaker 1: effort to silence channels they don't like. It's pretty nasty 289 00:16:41,000 --> 00:16:44,000 Speaker 1: out there, and there are ways to appeal the whole situation, 290 00:16:44,440 --> 00:16:48,600 Speaker 1: but it's time consuming and there's no guarantee that you're 291 00:16:48,600 --> 00:16:50,600 Speaker 1: going to actually get the results you want, and that's 292 00:16:50,640 --> 00:16:53,880 Speaker 1: really another tangent. It's another episode for another day. Now. 293 00:16:53,920 --> 00:16:56,120 Speaker 1: Most of the time the people who are sending a 294 00:16:56,200 --> 00:17:00,640 Speaker 1: DMCA notice want one of two things, or possibly both 295 00:17:00,680 --> 00:17:03,520 Speaker 1: of those things. Most of the time they want the 296 00:17:03,560 --> 00:17:06,560 Speaker 1: someone else to just take down the material that isn't theirs, 297 00:17:06,720 --> 00:17:09,359 Speaker 1: to remove it from whatever it is, whether it's a 298 00:17:09,440 --> 00:17:13,480 Speaker 1: video or a website or whatever. Sometimes they also want 299 00:17:13,480 --> 00:17:17,679 Speaker 1: to be compensated for their works use in someone else's stuff. 300 00:17:18,080 --> 00:17:20,080 Speaker 1: Sometimes they want both of these things. They want to 301 00:17:20,080 --> 00:17:22,680 Speaker 1: be paid and they want the material gone. But that's 302 00:17:22,720 --> 00:17:26,160 Speaker 1: not exactly what was happening with Ernie Smith's case. So 303 00:17:26,240 --> 00:17:29,720 Speaker 1: Smith received a DMCA notice regarding a photo that he 304 00:17:29,880 --> 00:17:33,919 Speaker 1: used of a keyfob, or as the photo description on 305 00:17:34,200 --> 00:17:38,600 Speaker 1: unsplash claims, a quote close up of a cell phone 306 00:17:38,720 --> 00:17:42,320 Speaker 1: on a car dashboard end quote. So this was an 307 00:17:42,320 --> 00:17:44,679 Speaker 1: image that Smith was using in connection with the story 308 00:17:44,720 --> 00:17:47,720 Speaker 1: he was relaying about a somewhat odd ride he had 309 00:17:47,760 --> 00:17:52,040 Speaker 1: while using a ride hailing service unsplash just in case 310 00:17:52,080 --> 00:17:55,640 Speaker 1: you're not familiar, because I wasn't. It's a stock photography 311 00:17:55,720 --> 00:17:59,720 Speaker 1: site and technically getty Image owns it. Getty Image purchased 312 00:17:59,720 --> 00:18:02,800 Speaker 1: on splash I think back in twenty twenty one, if 313 00:18:02,800 --> 00:18:06,040 Speaker 1: I'm not mistaken. So Getty is a huge name in 314 00:18:06,119 --> 00:18:10,160 Speaker 1: photography in general, stock photography in particular. Getting your images 315 00:18:10,160 --> 00:18:14,560 Speaker 1: from Getty typically requires a substantial subscription fee, particularly if 316 00:18:14,560 --> 00:18:17,359 Speaker 1: you want to be able to use an image in perpetuity. 317 00:18:17,720 --> 00:18:19,760 Speaker 1: Most folks do want to be able to use an 318 00:18:19,800 --> 00:18:21,960 Speaker 1: image in perpetuity. It means that you get to use 319 00:18:22,000 --> 00:18:26,320 Speaker 1: it forever and ever for whatever purpose you want, because otherwise, 320 00:18:26,600 --> 00:18:31,640 Speaker 1: if you're not having the agreement keep it in perpetuity, 321 00:18:31,640 --> 00:18:34,000 Speaker 1: it means that you have agreed to a limited amount 322 00:18:34,040 --> 00:18:36,240 Speaker 1: of time where you are allowed to use that image, 323 00:18:36,320 --> 00:18:38,320 Speaker 1: and then once that time is up, you would need 324 00:18:38,359 --> 00:18:42,360 Speaker 1: to go in and remove the image from whatever was inside. 325 00:18:42,800 --> 00:18:45,240 Speaker 1: Let me tell you, if you're running a website or 326 00:18:45,280 --> 00:18:48,000 Speaker 1: a blog, or a video series or whatever, you do 327 00:18:48,080 --> 00:18:50,240 Speaker 1: not want to have to keep up with a complicated 328 00:18:50,320 --> 00:18:54,760 Speaker 1: database of image rights and then regularly remove pictures from 329 00:18:54,960 --> 00:18:58,400 Speaker 1: your various works. That's a huge hassle. You're just asking 330 00:18:58,520 --> 00:19:01,920 Speaker 1: to miss something and leave yourself liable for legal action 331 00:19:02,040 --> 00:19:05,480 Speaker 1: down the line simply because it got so complicated and 332 00:19:05,520 --> 00:19:09,520 Speaker 1: convoluted that you overlooked one of those images. So most 333 00:19:09,560 --> 00:19:14,480 Speaker 1: people go with the in perpetuity option. But unsplash is 334 00:19:14,520 --> 00:19:18,560 Speaker 1: a stock photography site that licenses use of images for free. 335 00:19:18,880 --> 00:19:21,720 Speaker 1: You are allowed to make use of those images even 336 00:19:21,760 --> 00:19:24,320 Speaker 1: for commercial purposes. Like if you have a site that's 337 00:19:24,320 --> 00:19:27,560 Speaker 1: selling something, you can still use images on unsplash. Like 338 00:19:27,640 --> 00:19:30,000 Speaker 1: a lot of licenses say hey, you can use this 339 00:19:30,040 --> 00:19:33,800 Speaker 1: as long as it's not for commercial purposes, Unsplash you're 340 00:19:33,840 --> 00:19:36,320 Speaker 1: allowed to and you can use those images in just 341 00:19:36,359 --> 00:19:39,320 Speaker 1: about any way you want. There is an exception I'll 342 00:19:39,359 --> 00:19:41,679 Speaker 1: talk about in a second. You don't even have to 343 00:19:41,800 --> 00:19:45,359 Speaker 1: credit the photographer while you're doing so. You can just 344 00:19:45,520 --> 00:19:48,919 Speaker 1: use it unattributed. And this is kind of like what 345 00:19:49,040 --> 00:19:51,679 Speaker 1: people were doing on the web in general, but in 346 00:19:51,720 --> 00:19:55,040 Speaker 1: this case it's actually okay because it's covered by the license. 347 00:19:55,160 --> 00:19:58,320 Speaker 1: It's a licensed use. The only thing you're not allowed 348 00:19:58,320 --> 00:20:01,399 Speaker 1: to do is you cannot take images from unsplash and 349 00:20:01,440 --> 00:20:04,480 Speaker 1: then sell those images to other people. That would be 350 00:20:04,880 --> 00:20:08,240 Speaker 1: against the policy. You can use them again for commercial purposes, 351 00:20:08,440 --> 00:20:11,760 Speaker 1: like if your newsletter is a paid newsletter, that's fine. 352 00:20:11,880 --> 00:20:14,720 Speaker 1: You just can't troll through unsplashed, download a ton of 353 00:20:14,720 --> 00:20:17,560 Speaker 1: photos and then sell those pictures somewhere else. That's against 354 00:20:17,600 --> 00:20:21,719 Speaker 1: the rules. So Smith was following the rules. He had 355 00:20:21,760 --> 00:20:24,480 Speaker 1: pulled an image from a source that allows for that 356 00:20:24,640 --> 00:20:27,800 Speaker 1: kind of use. So imagine his surprise when he gets 357 00:20:27,800 --> 00:20:31,360 Speaker 1: a DMCA notice about this very image. Now, I want 358 00:20:31,359 --> 00:20:35,199 Speaker 1: to be clear, something like this could potentially happen, and 359 00:20:35,240 --> 00:20:37,920 Speaker 1: it could be on the up and up. It could 360 00:20:37,960 --> 00:20:42,320 Speaker 1: be possible that some photographer took a picture, someone else 361 00:20:42,400 --> 00:20:46,159 Speaker 1: grabbed that picture, and they submitted it to unsplash, but 362 00:20:46,200 --> 00:20:49,760 Speaker 1: they didn't do it with the photographer's permission. It's possible 363 00:20:49,800 --> 00:20:52,840 Speaker 1: that photographer might find out that their image is now 364 00:20:52,880 --> 00:20:56,640 Speaker 1: being used somewhere else and it wasn't licensed from them, 365 00:20:56,920 --> 00:20:59,359 Speaker 1: and maybe they're using some sort of detection or search 366 00:20:59,400 --> 00:21:03,920 Speaker 1: algorithm that's pulling up instances of that image. But typically 367 00:21:04,359 --> 00:21:07,600 Speaker 1: that photographer would then need to go through by sending 368 00:21:07,640 --> 00:21:10,600 Speaker 1: a notice to unsplash directly in order to get the 369 00:21:10,640 --> 00:21:13,360 Speaker 1: image taken down from unsplash, because going after folks who 370 00:21:13,800 --> 00:21:17,199 Speaker 1: have used the image from unsplash would be kind of 371 00:21:17,240 --> 00:21:21,120 Speaker 1: like treating the symptom but not the disease, because as 372 00:21:21,160 --> 00:21:24,360 Speaker 1: long as that image would stay on unsplash while other 373 00:21:24,400 --> 00:21:28,119 Speaker 1: folks could be making use of it. So partly you 374 00:21:28,119 --> 00:21:31,320 Speaker 1: would say, well, DMCA takedown notice should really go to 375 00:21:31,400 --> 00:21:35,520 Speaker 1: the photography site, not to Ernie Smith. So Smith gets 376 00:21:35,560 --> 00:21:38,960 Speaker 1: this notice and immediately he's somewhat skeptical of it, as 377 00:21:39,000 --> 00:21:41,760 Speaker 1: he should be. And the notice threatened to quote unquote 378 00:21:41,880 --> 00:21:44,560 Speaker 1: activate a case and a reference to section of the 379 00:21:44,640 --> 00:21:49,800 Speaker 1: DMCA called DMCA Section five twelve s. And you might say, well, 380 00:21:49,800 --> 00:21:51,840 Speaker 1: what the heck is that. Well, that section of the 381 00:21:51,920 --> 00:21:57,680 Speaker 1: DMCA is titled Limitations on Liability relating to Material Online, 382 00:21:57,840 --> 00:22:01,040 Speaker 1: And just from that title, if you just critically break 383 00:22:01,080 --> 00:22:04,400 Speaker 1: down that title, it should make your eyebrows go up, 384 00:22:04,640 --> 00:22:07,639 Speaker 1: because it's not the sort of title that sounds like 385 00:22:07,920 --> 00:22:11,120 Speaker 1: it would give a copyright claimant a lot of leverage. 386 00:22:11,119 --> 00:22:16,800 Speaker 1: In fact, the phrase limitations on liability seem to indicate 387 00:22:16,840 --> 00:22:19,280 Speaker 1: that this is something else entirely. This is something that 388 00:22:19,320 --> 00:22:23,240 Speaker 1: applies to a party that is potentially on the other 389 00:22:23,280 --> 00:22:26,080 Speaker 1: side of this issue. They have limitations on how they 390 00:22:26,119 --> 00:22:29,040 Speaker 1: are liable. In fact, if you really read through the 391 00:22:29,760 --> 00:22:34,320 Speaker 1: section of the DMCA, and I did, I don't recommend it. 392 00:22:34,320 --> 00:22:37,400 Speaker 1: It's not good reading. But if you did read through it, 393 00:22:37,400 --> 00:22:39,199 Speaker 1: it would be hard for you to figure out a 394 00:22:39,200 --> 00:22:42,720 Speaker 1: way where that section has any application to Smith, because 395 00:22:42,760 --> 00:22:47,119 Speaker 1: really it's more about how system providers. Again, things like 396 00:22:47,240 --> 00:22:51,480 Speaker 1: ISPs or YouTube or whatever would not be held liable 397 00:22:51,720 --> 00:22:56,600 Speaker 1: for monetary relief or quote injunctive or other equitable relief 398 00:22:56,800 --> 00:22:59,840 Speaker 1: end quote for the actions someone takes using their service. 399 00:23:00,040 --> 00:23:02,680 Speaker 1: In other words, the idea is that the platform isn't 400 00:23:02,760 --> 00:23:05,840 Speaker 1: held responsible for the actions of folks who are using 401 00:23:06,119 --> 00:23:09,560 Speaker 1: that platform to transmit material that isn't theirs. This is 402 00:23:09,600 --> 00:23:12,480 Speaker 1: like the concept of safe harbor, right that if you 403 00:23:12,640 --> 00:23:15,800 Speaker 1: operate a service and someone uses your service to do 404 00:23:15,840 --> 00:23:19,919 Speaker 1: something illegal, you didn't do the illegal thing. Your service 405 00:23:20,000 --> 00:23:22,719 Speaker 1: might have facilitated it, but you didn't do it. You 406 00:23:22,720 --> 00:23:26,840 Speaker 1: didn't commit the crime. Someone committed the crime using your services, 407 00:23:27,080 --> 00:23:30,040 Speaker 1: and that that person should be held responsible for the 408 00:23:30,040 --> 00:23:33,919 Speaker 1: criminal act, not you. So the section is called limited 409 00:23:34,000 --> 00:23:37,280 Speaker 1: liability because there are cases where you can be held 410 00:23:37,359 --> 00:23:39,800 Speaker 1: to account, right Like, it's not like you get out 411 00:23:39,840 --> 00:23:43,040 Speaker 1: of jail free. It's not that these platforms have no 412 00:23:43,200 --> 00:23:47,000 Speaker 1: responsibilities to answer to. If the service were to take 413 00:23:47,040 --> 00:23:50,160 Speaker 1: an active role in copyright infringement itself in some way, 414 00:23:50,400 --> 00:23:52,840 Speaker 1: then it would be liable. There are other ways as well, 415 00:23:53,160 --> 00:23:55,879 Speaker 1: But again, if we assume the provider is just doing 416 00:23:55,960 --> 00:23:59,160 Speaker 1: the job a facilitator. Then generally speaking, they're kind of 417 00:23:59,160 --> 00:24:01,800 Speaker 1: off the hook from a legal sense. But in other words, 418 00:24:01,840 --> 00:24:04,919 Speaker 1: this section doesn't really apply if you're trying to intimidate 419 00:24:04,960 --> 00:24:08,720 Speaker 1: somebody with a DMCA notice, right, Like, why would you 420 00:24:08,840 --> 00:24:13,439 Speaker 1: cite that part of the DMCA. It doesn't even carry 421 00:24:13,480 --> 00:24:18,920 Speaker 1: with it any like threat of legal action or consequences. 422 00:24:19,200 --> 00:24:21,240 Speaker 1: But that was not the only weird bit about the 423 00:24:21,280 --> 00:24:24,560 Speaker 1: takedown notice. The really weird thing, at least in my mind, 424 00:24:25,000 --> 00:24:27,960 Speaker 1: is the notice said it wouldn't matter if Ernie Smith 425 00:24:28,040 --> 00:24:32,520 Speaker 1: removed this picture or not from the newsletter. Removing the 426 00:24:32,560 --> 00:24:35,880 Speaker 1: picture would not stop the hurt train that was barreling 427 00:24:36,000 --> 00:24:39,359 Speaker 1: down the tracks towards Smith. In fact, the only way 428 00:24:39,520 --> 00:24:42,880 Speaker 1: to avert calamity would be to credit the image by 429 00:24:42,920 --> 00:24:46,080 Speaker 1: including a link that would go to a site called 430 00:24:46,280 --> 00:24:51,800 Speaker 1: tech for Gods. And that's tech the numeral for gods. 431 00:24:52,440 --> 00:24:55,760 Speaker 1: That seems weird, right that the real response that the 432 00:24:55,800 --> 00:24:59,399 Speaker 1: takedown was seeking was just a link to the site 433 00:24:59,400 --> 00:25:01,879 Speaker 1: that's supposed le generated the image in the first place. 434 00:25:02,160 --> 00:25:05,800 Speaker 1: You think they'd be asking Ernie Smith to take it down, 435 00:25:06,000 --> 00:25:09,080 Speaker 1: or asking him for money or maybe a licensing fee 436 00:25:09,359 --> 00:25:12,320 Speaker 1: something like that. But no, and it was weird, and 437 00:25:12,359 --> 00:25:15,520 Speaker 1: it prompted a bit of an investigation similar to what 438 00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:18,080 Speaker 1: I talked about when my friend told me they thought 439 00:25:18,080 --> 00:25:20,840 Speaker 1: something hinky was up with the company website that they 440 00:25:20,840 --> 00:25:24,159 Speaker 1: shared with me, and some of the same issues I 441 00:25:24,320 --> 00:25:27,440 Speaker 1: found back in those days, or variants of those issues, 442 00:25:27,600 --> 00:25:31,639 Speaker 1: had emerged upon a casual investigation into the website of 443 00:25:31,680 --> 00:25:35,920 Speaker 1: this supposed law firm. First, the alleged law firm's name 444 00:25:36,480 --> 00:25:41,720 Speaker 1: was Commonwealth Legal, but the HQ that the website listed 445 00:25:41,800 --> 00:25:47,280 Speaker 1: the actual physical address for the company was supposedly in Arizona. 446 00:25:47,760 --> 00:25:51,639 Speaker 1: Now that's already a huge red flag. Here's why. The 447 00:25:51,720 --> 00:25:56,000 Speaker 1: United States has only four states in it that are commonwealths. 448 00:25:56,280 --> 00:26:01,520 Speaker 1: Those four states are Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Massachusetts. You 449 00:26:01,560 --> 00:26:04,679 Speaker 1: will notice that Arizona is not on that list. So 450 00:26:04,760 --> 00:26:07,880 Speaker 1: there's no reason why a law firm in Arizona would 451 00:26:07,920 --> 00:26:11,840 Speaker 1: be called Commonwealth Legal. And in fact, the four states 452 00:26:11,880 --> 00:26:15,080 Speaker 1: I mentioned, for those of you not familiar with US geography, 453 00:26:15,359 --> 00:26:18,959 Speaker 1: they're all in the eastern half of the continental United States. 454 00:26:19,160 --> 00:26:22,920 Speaker 1: Arizona is way out west. You would think, like territorial 455 00:26:23,080 --> 00:26:27,240 Speaker 1: legal would make more sense to talk about territories rather 456 00:26:27,280 --> 00:26:31,560 Speaker 1: than commonwealths. But no, so the name itself already was like, 457 00:26:31,800 --> 00:26:34,119 Speaker 1: why would you call your law firm that in a 458 00:26:34,280 --> 00:26:37,359 Speaker 1: state that is really far away from any states that 459 00:26:37,400 --> 00:26:40,520 Speaker 1: are known as commonwealths. So there are historical reasons for 460 00:26:40,520 --> 00:26:43,600 Speaker 1: the whole commonwealth versus state thing. But even though that's 461 00:26:43,640 --> 00:26:46,359 Speaker 1: really fascinating, I am sensitive to the fact that I've 462 00:26:46,440 --> 00:26:50,520 Speaker 1: tangented about as much as any reasonable person would tolerate already, 463 00:26:50,600 --> 00:26:54,200 Speaker 1: so I will not go down that fun rabbit trail. 464 00:26:54,240 --> 00:26:57,400 Speaker 1: We'll get back to the hinky nature of this takedown notice. 465 00:26:57,520 --> 00:26:59,840 Speaker 1: So the name of the law firm is already suspect. 466 00:27:00,200 --> 00:27:02,760 Speaker 1: The website for the law firm claimed that the founders 467 00:27:02,880 --> 00:27:06,439 Speaker 1: established the company in twenty eighteen. However, looking into the 468 00:27:06,440 --> 00:27:09,400 Speaker 1: website you would find that it had a registration date 469 00:27:09,720 --> 00:27:13,800 Speaker 1: of March of this year. Also, it was registered in Canada, 470 00:27:14,200 --> 00:27:19,199 Speaker 1: an odd thing for a law firm located out of Arizona. 471 00:27:19,280 --> 00:27:22,199 Speaker 1: The images of the site of the supposed lawyers in 472 00:27:22,240 --> 00:27:25,199 Speaker 1: the firm included ones that didn't look totally natural. So, 473 00:27:25,240 --> 00:27:28,320 Speaker 1: in other words, there were some visual cues that perhaps 474 00:27:28,600 --> 00:27:32,719 Speaker 1: some of these images were computer generated or AI generated, 475 00:27:32,840 --> 00:27:35,480 Speaker 1: and in fact, according to the ours Technica article. A 476 00:27:35,520 --> 00:27:38,800 Speaker 1: company called Reality Defender looked into the matter and said 477 00:27:39,080 --> 00:27:42,720 Speaker 1: every single image of a person on that website appeared 478 00:27:42,760 --> 00:27:47,520 Speaker 1: to have been AI generated. Similarly, the lawyer bios were 479 00:27:47,600 --> 00:27:49,719 Speaker 1: all over the place. Some of them were listed as 480 00:27:49,760 --> 00:27:53,960 Speaker 1: having unlikely specialties, so like, you can be a copyright lawyer. 481 00:27:54,160 --> 00:27:57,160 Speaker 1: A friend of mine is a former patent lawyer. These 482 00:27:57,200 --> 00:28:01,040 Speaker 1: are real things, So seeing copyright lawyer on a site 483 00:28:01,080 --> 00:28:04,240 Speaker 1: like this that would seem to give legitimacy. However, some 484 00:28:04,320 --> 00:28:06,960 Speaker 1: of those lawyers were listed as being like both a 485 00:28:07,000 --> 00:28:10,920 Speaker 1: copyright lawyer as well as an expert in criminal law. 486 00:28:11,200 --> 00:28:14,560 Speaker 1: Those are just two very different branches of law, and 487 00:28:14,600 --> 00:28:16,959 Speaker 1: if you're specializing, it means you kind of you know, 488 00:28:17,119 --> 00:28:21,200 Speaker 1: have to focus on a specific branch, not two unrelated 489 00:28:21,240 --> 00:28:24,120 Speaker 1: branches of the law. So it seemed like the biographies 490 00:28:24,119 --> 00:28:27,159 Speaker 1: were actually meant to send a really intimidating message like 491 00:28:27,440 --> 00:28:29,639 Speaker 1: you got to do what we say, or you're going 492 00:28:29,720 --> 00:28:33,560 Speaker 1: to be in deep trouble, mister Smith. So again another 493 00:28:33,640 --> 00:28:36,640 Speaker 1: red flag. We're not done with the red flags yet, 494 00:28:36,760 --> 00:28:39,400 Speaker 1: but we do need to take another quick break to 495 00:28:39,440 --> 00:28:52,440 Speaker 1: thank our sponsors. We'll be right back. So we're going 496 00:28:52,520 --> 00:28:54,960 Speaker 1: through some of the red flags that were on this 497 00:28:55,080 --> 00:28:58,959 Speaker 1: website that kind of indicated that whatever this was, it 498 00:28:59,120 --> 00:29:02,400 Speaker 1: was not an act actual DMCA takedown notice, at least 499 00:29:02,400 --> 00:29:06,640 Speaker 1: not a legitimate one. The website for this supposed law 500 00:29:06,680 --> 00:29:09,240 Speaker 1: firm also states that the company is on the fourth 501 00:29:09,240 --> 00:29:11,880 Speaker 1: floor of a building in Arizona, and again it lists 502 00:29:11,960 --> 00:29:15,360 Speaker 1: the address. So Ernie Smith did what I did when 503 00:29:15,400 --> 00:29:18,120 Speaker 1: I was investigating this supposed real estate company that my 504 00:29:18,280 --> 00:29:21,360 Speaker 1: friend had me look into when they thought that maybe 505 00:29:21,440 --> 00:29:24,320 Speaker 1: they were getting a job offer. So Ernie Smith checked 506 00:29:24,400 --> 00:29:27,720 Speaker 1: Google street View to see what actually is there at 507 00:29:27,720 --> 00:29:30,800 Speaker 1: that physical address. When he did this, he found a small, 508 00:29:30,840 --> 00:29:33,240 Speaker 1: single story building with a banner outside of it that 509 00:29:33,320 --> 00:29:36,760 Speaker 1: said insurance. So if this building had a fourth floor, 510 00:29:36,800 --> 00:29:39,600 Speaker 1: it would have to be underground. Get another strike against 511 00:29:39,640 --> 00:29:42,320 Speaker 1: this law firm for being a real thing. So we 512 00:29:42,400 --> 00:29:45,440 Speaker 1: have all the earmarks of a scam. You've got a 513 00:29:45,520 --> 00:29:49,200 Speaker 1: note that carries a threatening implication that this is your 514 00:29:49,360 --> 00:29:51,960 Speaker 1: way of motivating a target to do whatever it is 515 00:29:52,000 --> 00:29:54,720 Speaker 1: you want them to do. You threaten them, you engage 516 00:29:54,760 --> 00:29:58,520 Speaker 1: their fear, They stress out, and they hurdly do whatever 517 00:29:58,560 --> 00:30:01,360 Speaker 1: it is that you're trying to get to do. You 518 00:30:01,400 --> 00:30:03,840 Speaker 1: also have a website that, at least on casual glance, 519 00:30:04,040 --> 00:30:06,840 Speaker 1: seems to indicate that you mean business and you've got 520 00:30:06,840 --> 00:30:09,880 Speaker 1: the legal firepower to make your target pay for failing 521 00:30:09,960 --> 00:30:13,520 Speaker 1: to comply that your threats have teeth to them. And 522 00:30:14,000 --> 00:30:18,480 Speaker 1: the request itself is so darn painless. You just have 523 00:30:18,560 --> 00:30:21,080 Speaker 1: to include that little load link back to tech for 524 00:30:21,160 --> 00:30:25,320 Speaker 1: Gods and all this goes away. This might raise a 525 00:30:25,400 --> 00:30:28,000 Speaker 1: question in your minds. It did for mind, which is 526 00:30:28,160 --> 00:30:31,040 Speaker 1: what the heck is tech for Gods? So I decided 527 00:30:31,080 --> 00:30:33,640 Speaker 1: I'd check it out. It's a site that's run by 528 00:30:33,640 --> 00:30:36,560 Speaker 1: a guy named Daniel Bartzak, who's bio on the site 529 00:30:36,560 --> 00:30:40,520 Speaker 1: says is a home automation expert, computer programmer, and blogger. 530 00:30:40,800 --> 00:30:43,840 Speaker 1: The site has got articles on it with like tips 531 00:30:43,840 --> 00:30:47,920 Speaker 1: and tricks for tech stuff, some reviews for certain products, 532 00:30:48,000 --> 00:30:51,280 Speaker 1: some DIY projects, that kind of thing. Like there are 533 00:30:51,360 --> 00:30:54,520 Speaker 1: articles if when I check today, that include stuff like 534 00:30:54,560 --> 00:30:57,520 Speaker 1: how much does a smart mirror cost? Or how to 535 00:30:57,560 --> 00:31:01,640 Speaker 1: clean a smart toilet for hygienic blome. So what's the 536 00:31:01,680 --> 00:31:07,200 Speaker 1: goal here, right? Why are these links the big part 537 00:31:07,920 --> 00:31:12,080 Speaker 1: of the whole threatening DMCA action? And did Bartzak have 538 00:31:12,160 --> 00:31:14,320 Speaker 1: anything to do with it? Well, let me answer the 539 00:31:14,360 --> 00:31:18,480 Speaker 1: second question. First, now you might think that perhaps there's 540 00:31:18,520 --> 00:31:22,440 Speaker 1: something to this and that Bartzak might have some involvement. 541 00:31:22,680 --> 00:31:24,800 Speaker 1: If you look at Tech for Gods and you scroll 542 00:31:24,840 --> 00:31:27,040 Speaker 1: all the way to the bottom, there is a notice 543 00:31:27,040 --> 00:31:29,960 Speaker 1: at the very bottom of the website that says, quote 544 00:31:30,280 --> 00:31:34,520 Speaker 1: all right reserved unless stated explicitly, Any graphic can be 545 00:31:34,640 --> 00:31:37,920 Speaker 1: used in your own content as long as link is 546 00:31:37,960 --> 00:31:43,120 Speaker 1: included back to this website end quote. So here's precedent, right, Like, 547 00:31:43,400 --> 00:31:47,400 Speaker 1: the site administrator is asking that sites that uses graphics 548 00:31:47,480 --> 00:31:50,200 Speaker 1: link back to his site, And if you dig around 549 00:31:50,240 --> 00:31:53,000 Speaker 1: on his site you can also see some other things 550 00:31:53,080 --> 00:31:56,120 Speaker 1: that are interesting that might make you think, oh, maybe 551 00:31:56,120 --> 00:32:01,480 Speaker 1: this is someone who's using some questionable means to pressure 552 00:32:01,760 --> 00:32:04,400 Speaker 1: someone to link back to their site. It's not a 553 00:32:04,720 --> 00:32:07,600 Speaker 1: guarantee and it's not a you know, like catching someone 554 00:32:07,640 --> 00:32:10,160 Speaker 1: red handed, but it just starts raising questions. For example, 555 00:32:10,240 --> 00:32:13,680 Speaker 1: he makes use of quote unquote AI writing assistance. Now 556 00:32:13,680 --> 00:32:15,600 Speaker 1: that actually makes sense to me because he puts out 557 00:32:15,640 --> 00:32:17,920 Speaker 1: a lot of content and it would be very difficult 558 00:32:18,000 --> 00:32:21,640 Speaker 1: to do that without the help of someone or something else. 559 00:32:21,960 --> 00:32:24,960 Speaker 1: He does say that every piece goes through a rigorous 560 00:32:24,960 --> 00:32:29,440 Speaker 1: proofreading and editing process before it's published. So while the 561 00:32:29,480 --> 00:32:33,560 Speaker 1: writing might be AI generated, supposedly it has gone through 562 00:32:34,040 --> 00:32:38,720 Speaker 1: an editing you know, pass or two before being published. 563 00:32:38,920 --> 00:32:41,920 Speaker 1: And according to Bartzak, he didn't take or own the 564 00:32:42,040 --> 00:32:45,120 Speaker 1: image in question, the one that prompted the whole DMCA 565 00:32:45,240 --> 00:32:47,960 Speaker 1: takedown in the first place, nor did he direct this 566 00:32:48,040 --> 00:32:51,520 Speaker 1: supposed law firm to go after Smith. What he did 567 00:32:51,600 --> 00:32:57,200 Speaker 1: do was he paid a service to buy backlinks to 568 00:32:57,320 --> 00:33:01,560 Speaker 1: his website tech for gods. So backlinks are just buying 569 00:33:02,200 --> 00:33:05,240 Speaker 1: links so that other websites will link to your page. 570 00:33:05,280 --> 00:33:07,560 Speaker 1: And you might say, well why do that. Here's why. 571 00:33:07,880 --> 00:33:11,160 Speaker 1: When it comes to ranking in searches, one of the 572 00:33:11,320 --> 00:33:14,560 Speaker 1: many components that determines where your site will pop up 573 00:33:14,760 --> 00:33:18,120 Speaker 1: within search results is the number and quality of links 574 00:33:18,160 --> 00:33:21,880 Speaker 1: that are going to your site. So if you launch 575 00:33:21,920 --> 00:33:25,160 Speaker 1: a website and there are these really big, reputable sites 576 00:33:25,200 --> 00:33:28,240 Speaker 1: out there that link to you, that's a huge boost 577 00:33:28,280 --> 00:33:32,360 Speaker 1: to your credibility and thus to your search rankings. Right Like, 578 00:33:32,720 --> 00:33:36,120 Speaker 1: if lots of reputable sites say that you know what 579 00:33:36,160 --> 00:33:40,080 Speaker 1: you're talking about, then sites like Google are going to say, well, 580 00:33:40,240 --> 00:33:42,800 Speaker 1: this person knows what they're talking about. Maybe you've got 581 00:33:42,840 --> 00:33:45,760 Speaker 1: some esteemed journalists who link to your work. That's going 582 00:33:45,840 --> 00:33:48,920 Speaker 1: to be great news from a search engine optimization standpoint, 583 00:33:49,000 --> 00:33:51,240 Speaker 1: And that's really what this all comes down to, search 584 00:33:51,320 --> 00:33:54,640 Speaker 1: engine optimization, making sure you rank high enough in search 585 00:33:54,680 --> 00:33:58,320 Speaker 1: that people see your stuff. We all know that if 586 00:33:58,360 --> 00:34:01,120 Speaker 1: it's below the fold, like, if it's below the point 587 00:34:01,120 --> 00:34:03,200 Speaker 1: where you would have to start scrolling down the list 588 00:34:03,200 --> 00:34:05,080 Speaker 1: of search results, a lot of folks aren't even going 589 00:34:05,120 --> 00:34:08,160 Speaker 1: to bother going that far. They certainly won't bother going 590 00:34:08,239 --> 00:34:10,960 Speaker 1: beyond the first page, and the very few who do 591 00:34:11,320 --> 00:34:14,439 Speaker 1: aren't going to go beyond page two, right, Like, that's 592 00:34:14,480 --> 00:34:17,320 Speaker 1: just general wisdom. There's very few people who will bother 593 00:34:17,719 --> 00:34:21,560 Speaker 1: diving deep, deep, deep into search results to try and 594 00:34:21,600 --> 00:34:24,000 Speaker 1: find a link that works for them. So you need 595 00:34:24,040 --> 00:34:26,959 Speaker 1: to rank high if you're going to be getting any 596 00:34:27,040 --> 00:34:31,279 Speaker 1: real traffic coming from search engines. Boy howdy, it's hard 597 00:34:31,320 --> 00:34:35,080 Speaker 1: to get those links, right. It's hard to get these 598 00:34:35,560 --> 00:34:38,440 Speaker 1: reputable sites to link to you. Like, you really need 599 00:34:38,480 --> 00:34:41,200 Speaker 1: to put out great content, and it has to be 600 00:34:41,239 --> 00:34:44,120 Speaker 1: stuff that people would want to link to. You have 601 00:34:44,160 --> 00:34:47,120 Speaker 1: to be discoverable in the first place. This can lead 602 00:34:47,120 --> 00:34:49,640 Speaker 1: to a catch twenty two situation, right because you can't 603 00:34:49,680 --> 00:34:52,480 Speaker 1: get discovered until you get more sites linking to you, 604 00:34:52,760 --> 00:34:54,600 Speaker 1: but more sites aren't going to link to you because 605 00:34:54,600 --> 00:34:58,520 Speaker 1: they haven't discovered you yet. That's a really frustrating experience 606 00:34:58,560 --> 00:35:01,880 Speaker 1: to be in. So what do you do well, Maybe 607 00:35:01,920 --> 00:35:05,719 Speaker 1: you purchase back links. Maybe you hire a company that 608 00:35:05,800 --> 00:35:08,040 Speaker 1: will make sure that these links go up on different 609 00:35:08,040 --> 00:35:10,640 Speaker 1: websites that link back to your site and thus boost 610 00:35:10,680 --> 00:35:13,880 Speaker 1: your search ranking. Maybe you employ the services of a 611 00:35:13,880 --> 00:35:16,919 Speaker 1: company that might use some underhanded tricks to get those 612 00:35:16,960 --> 00:35:21,200 Speaker 1: back links in place, by tricking people into including links, 613 00:35:21,360 --> 00:35:24,160 Speaker 1: because that works just as well as the legitimate link does. 614 00:35:24,520 --> 00:35:28,120 Speaker 1: Google doesn't know if a link to a website is 615 00:35:28,160 --> 00:35:33,040 Speaker 1: there because the person running the original linking site really 616 00:35:33,160 --> 00:35:35,759 Speaker 1: likes the linked content, or it's because they had been 617 00:35:35,800 --> 00:35:39,600 Speaker 1: intimidated into including a link to that content in order 618 00:35:39,640 --> 00:35:42,560 Speaker 1: to avoid a lawsuit. Google does know. Google just sees 619 00:35:42,600 --> 00:35:45,800 Speaker 1: the link, which, in Google's eyes, is like the linking 620 00:35:45,880 --> 00:35:49,919 Speaker 1: site is validating the linked site. Site A is saying, hey, 621 00:35:50,160 --> 00:35:52,600 Speaker 1: this is worth seeing, even if that link is really 622 00:35:52,640 --> 00:35:55,240 Speaker 1: Site A saying hey, I don't want to get sued 623 00:35:55,239 --> 00:35:57,640 Speaker 1: by site B, and they said that I needed to 624 00:35:57,680 --> 00:36:01,080 Speaker 1: do this link in order to avoid a d takedown. 625 00:36:01,400 --> 00:36:05,480 Speaker 1: It's sneaky, it's unethical, and again I don't necessarily think 626 00:36:05,520 --> 00:36:10,120 Speaker 1: this actually links back to Bartzak directly. He was likely 627 00:36:10,200 --> 00:36:13,920 Speaker 1: not aware of how the company he was using to 628 00:36:14,239 --> 00:36:17,320 Speaker 1: get those backlinks was actually going to go about doing it. 629 00:36:17,320 --> 00:36:20,160 Speaker 1: It does strike me as being similar to those companies 630 00:36:20,200 --> 00:36:23,480 Speaker 1: that would boost follower accounts on social media platforms. You 631 00:36:23,560 --> 00:36:25,960 Speaker 1: might remember back when that was a thing. You would have, 632 00:36:26,040 --> 00:36:29,120 Speaker 1: like a would be influencer who would then pay a 633 00:36:29,160 --> 00:36:32,160 Speaker 1: company so the company would link like hundreds or even 634 00:36:32,320 --> 00:36:36,839 Speaker 1: thousands of fake or low quality social media accounts to 635 00:36:36,960 --> 00:36:40,319 Speaker 1: follow the influencer and thus boost their follower numbers, which 636 00:36:40,360 --> 00:36:43,520 Speaker 1: makes the influencer appear more attractive to brands that want 637 00:36:43,560 --> 00:36:45,839 Speaker 1: to partner with them. This is pretty much the same 638 00:36:45,840 --> 00:36:48,520 Speaker 1: sort of thing we're seeing here, but with backlinks instead 639 00:36:48,520 --> 00:36:51,720 Speaker 1: of followers, and I get it. I understand the motivation 640 00:36:51,880 --> 00:36:56,560 Speaker 1: because it is hard out there. Getting discovered is really hard. 641 00:36:56,680 --> 00:37:00,760 Speaker 1: This podcast would probably have a fraction of the number 642 00:37:00,760 --> 00:37:03,600 Speaker 1: of listeners I get had I launched it just the 643 00:37:03,600 --> 00:37:06,879 Speaker 1: past few years. But when we started tech Stuff back 644 00:37:06,920 --> 00:37:10,160 Speaker 1: in two thousand and eight, the podcast space was way 645 00:37:10,280 --> 00:37:13,560 Speaker 1: less crowded. Most people didn't even know what a podcast was, 646 00:37:13,719 --> 00:37:17,160 Speaker 1: and hardly anyone had found a way to monetize it, 647 00:37:17,200 --> 00:37:20,080 Speaker 1: so it really wasn't a business yet. So I had 648 00:37:20,120 --> 00:37:23,719 Speaker 1: an advantage right when I launched tech stuff because it 649 00:37:23,760 --> 00:37:26,560 Speaker 1: was not that big of a crowded field. And today 650 00:37:26,600 --> 00:37:31,040 Speaker 1: it's far more difficult to get noticed. Particularly, it's hard 651 00:37:31,040 --> 00:37:34,440 Speaker 1: to get noticed because you've got people who are already 652 00:37:34,480 --> 00:37:37,240 Speaker 1: famous from some other form of media who are wading 653 00:37:37,280 --> 00:37:40,960 Speaker 1: into the podcast space. Right. You've got actors and writers 654 00:37:41,080 --> 00:37:44,400 Speaker 1: and like again, influencers, people who have already made a 655 00:37:44,480 --> 00:37:46,920 Speaker 1: name for themselves and they're like, well, heck, let's do 656 00:37:46,960 --> 00:37:50,160 Speaker 1: a podcast too, which I get. There's no shade on them. 657 00:37:50,239 --> 00:37:53,200 Speaker 1: It just means that it does get harder for those 658 00:37:53,640 --> 00:37:59,239 Speaker 1: normal schlubs like me who aren't big, famous celebrities to 659 00:37:59,520 --> 00:38:03,000 Speaker 1: stand out in that field. So I do understand the 660 00:38:03,080 --> 00:38:06,200 Speaker 1: motivation here, because even if you do all the work, 661 00:38:06,440 --> 00:38:09,560 Speaker 1: and even if you do that work really well and 662 00:38:09,600 --> 00:38:13,560 Speaker 1: you put out great stuff, there is no guarantee anyone 663 00:38:13,640 --> 00:38:18,200 Speaker 1: will find out about it, and that is tragic. So 664 00:38:18,239 --> 00:38:21,040 Speaker 1: the temptation to take shortcuts or to find ways to 665 00:38:21,040 --> 00:38:24,680 Speaker 1: boost visibility is extremely high. Now, to be clear, there 666 00:38:24,719 --> 00:38:27,960 Speaker 1: are ways to boost visibility that aren't underhanded or shady. 667 00:38:28,120 --> 00:38:31,279 Speaker 1: For example, reaching out to other podcasters and guesting on 668 00:38:31,360 --> 00:38:33,959 Speaker 1: their show, or having them guests on your show. Things 669 00:38:34,000 --> 00:38:38,760 Speaker 1: like that. These are generally pretty common and accepted ways 670 00:38:38,800 --> 00:38:42,560 Speaker 1: to boost visibility. They don't come with deceit, but they 671 00:38:42,560 --> 00:38:45,680 Speaker 1: do require a lot of work, and honestly, you only 672 00:38:45,719 --> 00:38:47,640 Speaker 1: have so many hours in a day or so much 673 00:38:47,760 --> 00:38:51,319 Speaker 1: energy to spare. Sometimes that work is just too much 674 00:38:51,360 --> 00:38:54,080 Speaker 1: on top of already making the thing that you want 675 00:38:54,120 --> 00:38:56,520 Speaker 1: to make. So I do sympathize with folks who want 676 00:38:56,520 --> 00:38:59,840 Speaker 1: to find a way to offload this effort so that 677 00:39:00,080 --> 00:39:02,040 Speaker 1: they can focus on the stuff they actually wanted to 678 00:39:02,040 --> 00:39:05,560 Speaker 1: do in the first place. I one hundred percent get it, 679 00:39:05,719 --> 00:39:09,000 Speaker 1: and goodness knows, I'm in a fortunate position. I am 680 00:39:09,040 --> 00:39:12,000 Speaker 1: a podcaster at a big media company where we have 681 00:39:12,239 --> 00:39:16,640 Speaker 1: entire departments dedicated to stuff like sales and marketing. I 682 00:39:16,680 --> 00:39:20,200 Speaker 1: couldn't do all that on my own, certainly. Anyway, I 683 00:39:20,239 --> 00:39:22,399 Speaker 1: thought I would talk about this because it does play 684 00:39:22,440 --> 00:39:25,600 Speaker 1: into the things I do find irritating about people in general. 685 00:39:25,800 --> 00:39:28,360 Speaker 1: You know, that desire to achieve a goal through trickery 686 00:39:28,440 --> 00:39:31,040 Speaker 1: and deceit, And it's worse now. Right back when I 687 00:39:31,160 --> 00:39:33,319 Speaker 1: was helping my friend. I was looking at things like 688 00:39:33,360 --> 00:39:36,160 Speaker 1: stock photography. I was looking at stuff that could be 689 00:39:36,280 --> 00:39:40,680 Speaker 1: traced to other sites. In the world of AI generated 690 00:39:40,719 --> 00:39:44,680 Speaker 1: images and AI generated content. Now you're far more likely 691 00:39:44,719 --> 00:39:48,040 Speaker 1: to come across a website that has unique images because 692 00:39:48,080 --> 00:39:51,200 Speaker 1: they were AI generated, And you're less likely to come 693 00:39:51,239 --> 00:39:54,720 Speaker 1: across unfinished web pages because someone didn't take the effort 694 00:39:54,840 --> 00:39:58,080 Speaker 1: to write something out. They could just have a content 695 00:39:58,239 --> 00:40:04,240 Speaker 1: generating AI create that material. So it is harder now 696 00:40:04,680 --> 00:40:09,000 Speaker 1: to suss out the scams from the legit sites. It's 697 00:40:09,080 --> 00:40:12,319 Speaker 1: really unfortunate. I do recommend if you want to learn 698 00:40:12,360 --> 00:40:15,640 Speaker 1: more about this story, definitely check out that Ours Technica 699 00:40:15,719 --> 00:40:19,080 Speaker 1: article by Kevin Purdy again, it's titled fake AI law 700 00:40:19,120 --> 00:40:23,080 Speaker 1: firms are sending fake DMCA threats to generate fake SEO gains. 701 00:40:23,360 --> 00:40:26,160 Speaker 1: And also make sure you check out Ernie Smith and 702 00:40:26,239 --> 00:40:29,799 Speaker 1: his newsletter Tedium. Smith comes across to me as a 703 00:40:29,960 --> 00:40:33,759 Speaker 1: very smart and very funny journalist. I hope you are 704 00:40:33,840 --> 00:40:37,439 Speaker 1: all well and I'll talk to you again really soon. 705 00:40:43,280 --> 00:40:47,920 Speaker 1: Tech Stuff is an iHeartRadio production. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, 706 00:40:48,239 --> 00:40:51,960 Speaker 1: visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen 707 00:40:52,000 --> 00:40:56,600 Speaker 1: to your favorite shows,