4 ms·

And here's why those points don't matter: 1) The debate is centered on Google News. As far as I know, News is one of the few services where Google haven't, don

by phlo 14y ago

And here's why those points don't matter: 1) The debate is centered on Google News. As far as I know, News is one of the few services where Google haven't, don't and won't show ads. "Systematic clipping of one or two sentences [...] for the purpose of providing an ad-free overview and linking to the respective stories" sounds like "fair use" to me. 2) They are publishing their material on the web, for the world to see. If you'd want an opt-in for every crawler out there, no search engine would ever be able to take off and index a significant portion of the web. By the way, an opting out from all (obedient) crawlers is as simple as "Disallow: /" 3) Passing a query on to google through a spoofed IPv6 address doesn't make any sense. Apart from that, there's several services offering just that functionality. Try DuckDuckGo, for example. (I'm not quite sure which search engine they use nowadays, but afaik, the project started out using Google.)

patrickg 14y ago
2) There is no such thing as "fair use" in Germany's copyright law.
boboblong 14y ago
>The debate is centered on Google News. As far as I know, News is one of the few services where Google haven't, don't and won't show ads. "Systematic clipping of one or two sentences [...] for the purpose of providing an ad-free overview and linking to the respective stories" sounds like "fair use" to me. Then Google should have no issue with not linking to publishers who don't want to be linked to. As an aside, I disagree that it's fair use, because it's done systematically as part of a commercial enterprise. >They are publishing their material on the web, for the world to see. If you'd want an opt-in for every crawler out there, no search engine would ever be able to take off and index a significant portion of the web. By the way, an opting out from all (obedient) crawlers is as simple as "Disallow: /" If you believe that Google is infringing the publishers' copyrights, then it is not the responsibility of the publishers to opt out. See my response to your first point.

by phlo 14y ago

patrickg 14y ago

2) There is no such thing as "fair use" in Germany's copyright law.

boboblong 14y ago

>The debate is centered on Google News. As far as I know, News is one of the few services where Google haven't, don't and won't show ads. "Systematic clipping of one or two sentences [...] for the purpose of providing an ad-free overview and linking to the respective stories" sounds like "fair use" to me. Then Google should have no issue with not linking to publishers who don't want to be linked to. As an aside, I disagree that it's fair use, because it's done systematically as part of a commercial enterprise. >They are publishing their material on the web, for the world to see. If you'd want an opt-in for every crawler out there, no search engine would ever be able to take off and index a significant portion of the web. By the way, an opting out from all (obedient) crawlers is as simple as "Disallow: /" If you believe that Google is infringing the publishers' copyrights, then it is not the responsibility of the publishers to opt out. See my response to your first point.