Hi everyone, and welcome to episode 8 of The iGaming SEO Show. I’m Alan, SEO Manager at Big Pond Digital, and today I’m joined by Ari Pournaras. How’s it going? What’s new in the crazy world of iGaming SEO? A lot, as we’re about to find out — I feel like I need a holiday. You’re getting warm with the weather here. Today we’re discussing what’s become a pretty hot topic in SEO at the moment — DMCA strikes.

 

What is a DMCA strike?

It stands for Digital Millennium Copyright Act — a law brought out years ago that had to do with people copying content. As an affiliate, I used to get my website copied a lot — page for page, absolutely everything — so this was a way to say “this is my content, this is the original source, don’t copy it.” Otherwise you’d run into problems with Google and with people just lifting your work. So it was a good thing when it first came out.

When it comes to iGaming, there’s now a bit of a loophole that’s been exposed. People can file fake DMCA strikes against content that’s ranking well, take it down, and gain positions themselves. That’s been happening for some time now, but the past few weeks have been really heavy.

 

Why are we talking about this for iGaming specifically?

We’ve got a few clients ranking very prominently on page one for the big-hitting terms — online casino, slots, certain betting keywords. Those seem to be the most attacked, in certain countries especially. One client got hit by a fake DMCA. It took the page down, it took us a long time to get it back up in the first place, and then there were constant attacks daily — I think I counted 22 within a week. Pretty intense.

I put a message out on LinkedIn saying this is happening, and a lot of people reached out — affiliates, operators. The pattern is clear: it’s hitting websites doing well on tier-one, high-search-volume keywords. There were a few attacks on lower-end terms too, which surprised me, but in general it’s the top-of-the-page rankings getting absolutely hammered.

 

How well known is the issue right now?

Pretty well known. From the LinkedIn post alone, a lot of people got in touch saying “I’m dealing with that too.” I think the attacks are mostly being run by one specific group, with a lot of copycats jumping in. It’s illegal — when you file a DMCA, you’re stating multiple times that someone has stolen your content. There’s no way to verify it, which is the problem. Anyone can do it. Just to be clear: Alan hasn’t stolen anything. It’s super annoying — you spend all that time and budget to get to where you need to be, and then with a click of someone’s fingers it’s gone. There is a way of bringing it back faster, but the whole process is confusing and very much a gray area right now.

 

How do these fake DMCA strikes actually happen?

There are a few ways. Anyone watching can see who’s filed a strike against them at lumendatabase.org — it’s a bit slow at the moment because a lot of people are loading it. Do an advanced search on your brand name, because the simple search brings back random results. The advanced one shows you actual requests against your site.

Google doesn’t act on all of them. The attacker needs to specify the type of content that’s been “stolen” — the more specific they are, the more chance they have of getting it removed. In other cases that work, the attacker scrapes your content, places it on a site they control, and claims that’s the original. That’s easily done — you can do it with AI and it doesn’t take much. It’s not sophisticated. That’s why it’s a real red-flag issue: it’s too easy, and it’s open to anybody.

The people who have a reason to do this are, in my opinion, the websites competing against you. A lot of these attacks are probably coming from the black hat sites you see in the mix. I can’t prove that, but the timing — fake DMCAs ramping up around the same time as black hat parasite SEO appearing in competitive SERPs — is suspicious. That’s my suspicion, plus a lot of copycats trying to gain that edge.

 

Are affiliates or operators more at risk?

Depends who’s ranking. I’ve seen more operators because of the markets and keywords we compete in, but there are affiliates too — most of the LinkedIn messages I got were from affiliates, while our agency-side examples are operators.

 

Have you noticed a pattern in which pages get removed?

If you have great rankings, you’re already tracking them. So watch for any sudden drops, especially on keywords like “online casino”, “slots” or anything high-volume. If a page suddenly loses all its keywords at once, do a quick search on Google. If your page has been removed for copyright reasons, you’ll see a notice at the bottom of the search results with a link to the Lumen Database.

You also sometimes get a notice through Google Search Console — but we’ve had instances where you don’t, so don’t rely on that alone. The best protection is having a rank tracker pulling real-time. There’s a delay between getting the Search Console notice and seeing it on Lumen, and you want to act as fast as possible.

For every client we track thousands of keywords, but I’d recommend creating a separate profile that just tracks the five or ten core pages making the majority of the money — the highest-tier keywords. You can skim that a few times a day, or hourly if your tracker supports it. Frequently checking it is key. There’s a lot of money on the table, and if it happens and you pick the wrong option in the counter-notice, you could be waiting weeks. Another issue: once a page gets reindexed, it doesn’t necessarily come back at the same position.

 

So it’s a double hit?

Yes — your page gets removed and you lose a lot of traffic, then once it’s reinstated (which could take days or weeks), there’s no guarantee you’ll come back to the same ranking. There’s a high chance you’ll end up lower. The example we lived through: we were on page one, top three, for really competitive terms, and when it eventually got reinstated we were pushing for page two. Big hit. Collateral damage. And the difference between top three and anything below that or page two is essentially the difference between making money and being invisible.

 

How easy is it to file a fake DMCA?

It’s basically a form. You can make the wording legal-sounding, and from some of the requests I’ve seen it’s clear they’re using AI to write the paragraph. There are a few steps, but it’s not going to take an incredible amount of time. So crazy when you think about how much damage it does. Easy for somebody to go in and do.

I’m hoping there are legal consequences when these people get caught — but they’re using fake names, fake details, and abusing VPNs. They’ll attack a site by submitting maybe 20 requests, and they only need one to stick to do the damage.

 

Why does Google act on these so quickly?

When it comes to copyright law, platforms are funny about it because they’re liable. They could be taken to court and lose a lot of money. So they act very quickly when something looks legal enough. They’d rather take it down to avoid any responsibility on their part than spend time investigating — which damages the website’s reputation, revenue and traffic, but protects Google legally. They do investigate when you submit a counter-notice, but depending on how you do it, that can take ages.

 

Why is there no verification on the submission?

That’s the question other SEOs are asking too. There’s no verification. Any time you log into Gmail, you have to verify through an authenticator — most Google products are like that. But this seems to be a loophole. Especially when there’s so much money on the table and it’s a legal claim — you’re saying somebody’s stealing your property. That’s serious. You’d think there’d be a step that verifies the person filing the report is a real person, not a bot or someone in a basement.

 

How aware is Google of the abuse?

I’m not sure they’re that aware, which is why people need to make more noise. The more we talk about it, the more chance it gets fixed. iGaming is particularly prominent for these tactics — it’s always attracted them. From when I started 15 years ago, you’d see something exposed, it would work for a few months, Google would do something about it, and it would go away. If enough people talk about it and Google takes notice, they’ll install a verification step — they have to. It seems out of control at the moment.

 

Is this negative SEO?

100%. You’re not making any positive contribution to your own website. You’re there to take somebody out maliciously. It’s a double whammy at the moment because black hats already benefit from the parasite canonical trick — search any country and you’ll see multiple results — and now you’ve got fake DMCAs on top of that. Really effective for them.

 

What actually happens when a page gets hit?

Nothing happens on the page itself. The page just gets removed from Google’s search results — pulled from the index. That’s a different type of strike to one we also had recently for a website in a gray market where licensing was ambiguous, and in that case the host pulled the entire website down. The copyright DMCA strike is just a removal from the index.

 

Is it page-by-page or could a whole site be at risk?

It feels page by page. We haven’t seen examples of entire websites being pulled down for copyright. We’ve seen attacks on whole sites, but Google doesn’t act because they’re too vague. The risk question is real though — once attackers know it works, they’ll keep pushing, especially against prominent rankings. There’s money on the table, so as long as it’s easy to abuse, they’ll keep doing more of it.

 

Who’s actually doing this?

There’s a name that comes to mind — I won’t name them, but people who’ve had similar experiences will know. There are a lot of imitators, smaller groups copycatting them. I don’t think it’s legit operators in regulated markets — that would be too risky. It’s the black hats and grayer casinos. Get caught and the consequences could be serious — jail time. The people I’m talking to who are dealing with this day-to-day broadly agree.

 

Is this only happening in high-value SERPs?

Mainly. Casino terms, betting terms, slots — maybe some blackjack, roulette, bonus terms. The high-end, high-volume keywords where most of the money is. Though I did see specific game pages being removed the other day, which surprised me — they weren’t even popular games, so I couldn’t see the financial logic. Strange one.

 

Have you spotted any patterns in how the attacks are submitted?

Yes — you can see the same fake names posting the same requests for multiple websites, the same boilerplate message that sounds legal enough to work. They’ve found a script that gets content pulled and they’re reusing it.

 

Could agencies be doing this?

I’d really doubt that. Anyone could be doing it, but I’d be surprised. It seems to be the more obvious black hats you can see in the results.

 

How can you best protect yourself?

Number one: keep a close eye on rankings. Create a separate tracking profile for your top five to ten pages — the ones targeting the keywords that drive the majority of FTDs. Track every few hours if you can, or at least daily. Check that profile every day, and if there’s an issue, do a manual Google search. If you scroll to the bottom of the SERP and see the removal notice, click through to Lumen Database to confirm the page has been removed.

 

If you’re hit, how do you file the counter-notice?

You need to file a counter-notice straight away. Timothy was on the podcast a few episodes ago talking about black hat parasite SEO, and he later did a really useful LinkedIn post about this. We tried a few different methods of getting pages back — some worked within a couple of hours, others took weeks. The trick he posted: when you file the counter-notice, write your paragraph and then pick this very specific option — “Complainant doesn’t have the right to make this request.” Pick anything else and it can take weeks. Pick that, and you can have the page back within an hour.

We tested it. Some pages came back within an hour or two, others took weeks. People were apparently offering Timothy crazy money to fix this for them, when really it’s about selecting the right option in a form. That tells you everything about where we’re at — nobody really knows what’s going on.

One small bright side: if you’re getting DMCA strikes in the first place, it means you’re doing well SEO-wise. It’s almost a badge of honour — frustrating when you lose them, but a sign you’re ranking. Inside the text box, write a short, legal-sounding paragraph asserting the rights to your original content.

 

Does it matter who files the counter-notice?

It works as an agency, but ideally it should come from someone with an email address attached to the domain in question. Higher up in the organisation is better, but if waiting for that delays things, just submit it as fast as you can. The other counter-notice options work too, they just take longer — about 17 days for a review. Speed matters.

 

Are there any preventative tools or registrations?

You can go to copyright.gov and use their DMCA Designated Agent Directory to register your top content — your casino page, your slots page, any of the pages bringing in a lot of FTDs. I’m not sure it stops you being attacked, but having that registration means in your counter-notice you can point to the fact that the content is officially copyrighted, which may speed up reinstatement. We’ll link both copyright.gov/dmca-directory and the counter-notice form in the description.

 

Should operators have backup pages ready?

You could diversify, but those backup pages would be equally at risk if they started ranking well. It’s not really a workaround — whatever’s ranking is the target. It comes back to tracking. There are also tools you can use to spot if someone’s copied your content — Copyscape is the well-known one, been around for years. Use it to monitor for stolen content. Combine that with proper tracking and the right counter-notice method, and you stay on top.

 

Is Google doing enough to prevent this?

No. They’re too busy with the AI race. People realise that and are taking advantage. You’ve got the black hat parasite canonical trick still working, expired domains being repurposed with tactics that worked 15 years ago, and now fake DMCAs on top. Google isn’t doing enough — people need to make more noise so they install a verification step.

 

Is iGaming SEO going to get worse with black hat tactics?

I hope not. I’ve been doing this for a long time and there are always tactics like this in the industry — they work for a while, the algorithm changes, something gets done about them, and they go away. Then something else comes along. There are always people pushing the boundaries trying to find loopholes and make money from them, and they do make a lot of money. Tactics will change, search engines might change, but somebody will always be pushing.

It does feel more intense than usual right now. Parasite SEO has actually been around for years — it’s just being abused a lot lately. Same with DMCA — it’s been around forever, but suddenly everyone’s learning about it at once. What worries me is that once people realise how easy something like this is, it gives them ideas for other black hat tactics. It could keep growing.

The black hat parasite canonical thing isn’t technically illegal — buying an expired domain and putting content on it isn’t illegal in itself. Ranking it is exposing a Google loophole. The fake DMCA copyright thing is illegal. Different ballgame — get caught and you could be jailed.

 

Is this worse than link spam attacks?

Quite different — and seems more effective. Link spam attacks still happen, but for the most part they don’t really work anymore. This one is really, really effective. You see results straight away, with less effort.

 

Are big sites being affected too?

The biggest. From massive operators down to affiliates — anybody who’s ranking. Whoever’s ranking. No shame. They’ll take down anybody. Customers lose, sites lose positions, the attackers gain positions, they make money, they rinse and repeat.

 

Number one top tip?

Track everything at least daily — ideally every few hours — for your top-performing pages. If you see something missing from the index and you spot the notice, go to Lumen, file the counter-notice using the link we’ll put in the description, and pick “Complainant doesn’t have the right to make this request” if it’s a fake copyright claim. That’s the option that gets you back fastest. If it’s something else, you’re in for a waiting game.

Then beyond that — register top pages via copyright.gov’s DMCA directory, use Copyscape to monitor for stolen content, and stay focused on your money pages.

I asked for one top tip and you gave me three — that’s why you’re the best in the business. We need to help people. I’ve been getting LinkedIn messages and I’m happy to help anyone fight against it. The more noise we make about this, the more chance Google will see it and actually do something. I’m sure they’re watching. I hope.

Ari, thanks again — good to chat. Cheers. Thanks for listening, everyone — stay tuned for episode 9. Take care.