- A page about Europe from Qatar Airways
- One news article about pollution in India
- An opinion piece on a German newspaper
- A link to an article about upload filters on a lawyer website
- A page about road safety from the EU commission
- An article from a NY law university about a speaker about "Labor Recruitment and its Regulation in the US-Mexico-Central America Corridor"
And several other unrelated links about copyright reform, which adds up to more than half of the links on that DCMA request.
And it was approved?
Not really effective ones. That's part of the problem. I believe the perjury penalty only applies if the request was made intentionally in bad faith, not for negligence.
While Google would probably win if it came down to a lawsuit, the two options they have are to take it down and let the site operator dispute it, or go to court to defend the actions of a group they're unaffiliated with. The obvious choice for pretty much any group is to take it down.
It's essentially toothless because it's near impossible to prove, and it takes all responsibility off the filer.
BS companies making completely BS claims (the other links also make no sense)
But big copyright doesn't care