A copyright complaint can remove a page from Google search results based on a notice, even if the copyright claims are later disputed or inaccurate. The Press Gazette has seen this happen twice this year.
At the end of June, the journalism trade center reported that the second part of its report on the marketing company Clickout Media was removed from Google searches following an anonymous complaint under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
The previous removal of March affected the original investigation in the same series. Both complaints cited unrelated content as the source. The Press Gazette called both complaints false.
The details of who installed them are still unclear. The March notification came via a “US hub” from an anonymous private entity, while the June notification was from an outgoing sender we could not identify. In both cases, the live, original page has been removed from Google results, and the Press Gazette questions the claims of ownership behind each notice.
In March, the alleged plagiarized work was a 2024 article on the tech site The Verge, which had nothing to do with the complaint. In June, it was a forum with a month old post about online casinos. There is no such thing as reporting that was intended to identify you.
March’s demotion didn’t stop at one topic. It also removed a follow-up of the same story from another trade publication.
How Removal Works
Under the DMCA, someone claiming copyright can send Google a notice asking it to remove a page from search results. The page can be removed from the list if Google acts on the notice. The burden of disputing it then falls on the landlord.
The system’s Google account leaves space for this effect. In its Transparency Report, Google says that people submitting requests may provide incorrect information, that it cannot always verify the accuracy of the request, and that it cannot always notify the site owner before the content is removed.
The law does not require Google to determine whether a copyright claim is valid, which is why a disputed page can remain without results for a long time even after the owner has objected. Roger Montti laid out why this rule leaves Google little room to maneuver. When a page is removed from the list, Google adds a line at the bottom of the affected results page. It indicates that the results have been removed due to a DMCA complaint and provides a link to the Lumen website, where the notice is kept. The user only notices this space if they read that far down.
A Strategy That Has Appeared Before
The copyright reduction was previously intended for search results. Back in 2018, I reported on a tactic where people pretending to be copyright owners were submitting fake DMCA notices to lower their competitors in search rankings. Sometimes, they even use names that resemble real companies to make their claims look credible. These targets ranged from pirate sites to at least one small business challenged by a competitor.
Weaknesses are also seen in other removal tools. Roger Montti blocked a Google bug last August that allowed anonymous attackers to use a public URL scraping tool to take down live pages, and one site lost more than 400 articles online.
Google’s Danny Sullivan said at the time, there was no way to prevent the removal. Although it was a different exploitation, the main problem was the same. A purpose-built removal system can be a way to take down content that someone wishes to suddenly disappear.
The Press Gazette case is part of a larger discussion about the company and its coverage. This report describes the operation of parasite SEO when a company buys established websites to improve its Google presence. The SEJ looked into the practice in November, when Google defended its efforts to enforce the site’s reputation rules as the European Commission began its investigation.
Scale is Hard to Measure
It is quite challenging to determine how effective false or controversial notifications are. Lumen, which operates as a research project, hosts tens of millions of takedown notices covering billions of URLs. Researchers have tapped into this resource to uncover organized campaigns of copyright abuse, often aimed at reputation management.
Lumen itself points out that having a notification in the archive does not prove that the request was valid or that the platform acted on it. The record simply reflects what was requested, not whether the claim was accurate.
Google says it rejects requests it identifies as abusive or inappropriate, and Techdirt described Google as more aggressive than most sites in rejecting questionable DMCA notices. In the March issue, SEO consultant Glenn Gabe wrote in X that the complaint to clear Google’s checks surprised him, calling it an unreasonable reduction. June’s appeal was still ongoing at the time of Press Gazette reporting.
Why This Matters
The downsizing process may seem like a small step, since the person filing the notice doesn’t face many immediate real-world consequences. Making a false claim is also inexpensive. The person or entity targeted will have to notice the removal, file a counter-notice, and go through the process, which can feel a little confusing.
Inconsistency affects how long a page is missing. When the Press Gazette’s March article was removed, it was quickly restored within a day after reaching Google. However, the June article was not yet available when they published their follow-up. In cases like these, access can affect how quickly deletions are updated. The news organization was able to publicly propose the first takedown, something most sites are unable to do.
A page that has been removed due to a negative complaint can remain out of Google’s results during the counter notification process, which takes at least days and is quite long. On the page that brings in a lead or a sale, that gap comes with a direct cost. The removal also happens silently, so the site owner may not notice that the page is gone until the traffic drops.
What you can do
You can reduce the time to make the download invisible. Google’s removal line sits at the bottom of the results page for affected queries, so searching for your main topics and pages can open one. A sudden drop in impressions or clicks of one URL in the search console can be an early flag to check. The Lumen database allows you to search for notifications that name your domain.
If the page has been removed and you believe the claim is incorrect, Google’s process allows for a counter notification. Filling it out quickly is important, because the recovery clock only starts once Google finds it. Google’s DMCA help pages lay out the steps and what a counter-notice should include. A wait of 10 to 14 business days after a valid counter-notice is legal.
Holding on to time-stamped copies of your work is also helpful. A public archival record of the page, along with its publication date, gives you proof of original ownership if a later complaint claims you copied it.
None of this prevents an appeal from being filed. It reduces the window between removal and response, which is part of your control.
Looking Forward
Some of the legal reasons for this matter are beyond Google’s control, prompting a discussion about whether the takedown plan should be revised.
This debate could go on for years. The most pressing question is how quickly you can see if one of your pages suddenly disappears. Viewing your emissions is a bit of a defense, but for now, it’s the best option available.
More resources
Featured Image: Summit Art Creations/Shutterstock
