What we observed
Our 2014 article reported that a Google search for Oboom did not show the expected page and displayed a copyright-removal notice. This revision describes that historical observation, not today’s search results.
Interpreting the complaint record
The original followed a ChillingEffects link and argued that an incorrect DMCA notice caused the omission. A screenshot and complaint record alone cannot establish whether a notice was valid, how Google reviewed it, or every reason a page was absent.
This revision therefore does not state as fact that a false notice removed Oboom. It separates the observed search result from the explanation proposed at the time. Speculation about review processes and historical notice volumes is not presented as current fact.
Delisting is different from a service shutdown
Absence from search results does not mean a website is offline or its hosted files have been removed. Results can also vary by query, region, and date. Rights holders should check the specific page and file URLs separately when reviewing outcomes.
Source: PiracyTakedown’s 2014 report and its preserved screenshot. See ChillingEffects and Lumen for interpreting records, and Google’s official guidance for current reporting steps.