8 ms·

Going to have to go with Amazon on this one. Why should Google simply be allowed to unilaterally disregard all copyright claims?

arithmetic 17y ago
Hello kettle, this is pot. You're black. :)
patio11 17y ago
Google's approach to copyright has been, since day one, "Our engineers are faster than your lawyers, and scale better, too." Question: is making a copy of every page on the Internet, and then data mining the link graph (and other information) to commercially exploit it, industrial scale copyright violation? Answer: Maybe! However, it will take years for that question to be resolved in your favor in court, and by then we'll be the world's most influential Internet company, you'll still just be some sap with a web page. After we're a billion dollar company, if you disagree with the way we do business, you can just opt out of being findable by the customers we gained using your data. P.S. If you opt out, and somebody reprints your content on their site next to AdSense ads... well, rest assured that if you send us a DMCA notice we'll treat it with the all the care and responsiveness that Google's paying customers receive. Question: Do we owe you for the profits we got from those AdSense ads? Answer: Maybe! However, it will take years for that question to be resolved in your favor in court, and the effort will cost you many thousands of dollars in legal fees to recoup far less in damages. You will not win a judgment of willful infringement because we'll just blame it on the computer. We can't be expected to check every result, naturally -- there are only 10,000 of us and even if we spent all day every day policing abuses of our system it would never be enough. So really, you should just suck it up and let us keep the money. That's what everyone else does: we have the numbers to prove it.
- nostrademons 17y ago
  That's been the business model of nearly every successful startup, and several unsuccessful ones: Q[Facebook]: Isn't asking every teenager and 20-something to provide all their personal details, and then selling that to advertising partners, a massive privacy violation? A: Maybe! However, it will take years for that question to be resolved, and in the meantime every teenager and 20-something will happily provide those details so they can throw sheep at each other (and more importantly, hook up). You are, of course, welcome to not use FaceBook, but then your friends will stop talking to you and you will never get laid. Q[Youtube]: Isn't allowing anyone to upload video in seconds going to encourage massive copyright violation of all videos ever made? A: Maybe! However, it will take years for that question to be resolved in your favor in court. And Google over there has a vested interest in making certain that it will not be resolved in your favor. So before that happens, they will buy us for exorbitant amounts of money and sic their exorbitantly-priced lawyers on you. Q[Napster]: Isn't providing a peer-to-peer music service just a way to encourage massive copyright violation? A: Maybe! However, it will take years for that question to be resolved in your favor in court, and by then we'll be the world's most influential Internet company, and you'll still just be some sap with a web page. After we're a billion dollar company...oh shit, your lawyers are faster than we thought. Q[Craigslist]: Isn't an anonymous classified-ads website just going to be a haven for prostitutes to pick up clients? A: Maybe! However, chances are that whatever judge you get uses those prostitutes' services, because he is not on FaceBook and hence doesn't get laid. Case dismissed.
  - patio11 17y ago
    After we're a billion dollar company...oh shit, your lawyers are faster than we thought. Thank you, I needed a good belly laugh today.
shrikant 17y ago
How will Google be disregarding the copyright claims? The Books Rights Registry [...] would oversee payments for authors arising from Google's use of the works [...] And why would you "go with Amazon"? They're shitting bricks that the the rightsholders (and publishers, as the case may be) might be able to screw Amazon out of their pricing power. Of course Amazon would want copyright changes via the US Congress - their lobbying would be more effective there. Amended copyright law in response to technological developments? DMCA, tyvm. And surely Amazon is large enough to be one of the "commercial or private entities" that could license the library rights from the Registry. Naaah, we'd just rather our current way of doing business is not threatened, now or ever..

arithmetic 17y ago

Hello kettle, this is pot. You're black. :)

patio11 17y ago

Google's approach to copyright has been, since day one, "Our engineers are faster than your lawyers, and scale better, too." Question: is making a copy of every page on the Internet, and then data mining the link graph (and other information) to commercially exploit it, industrial scale copyright violation? Answer: Maybe! However, it will take years for that question to be resolved in your favor in court, and by then we'll be the world's most influential Internet company, you'll still just be some sap with a web page. After we're a billion dollar company, if you disagree with the way we do business, you can just opt out of being findable by the customers we gained using your data. P.S. If you opt out, and somebody reprints your content on their site next to AdSense ads... well, rest assured that if you send us a DMCA notice we'll treat it with the all the care and responsiveness that Google's paying customers receive. Question: Do we owe you for the profits we got from those AdSense ads? Answer: Maybe! However, it will take years for that question to be resolved in your favor in court, and the effort will cost you many thousands of dollars in legal fees to recoup far less in damages. You will not win a judgment of willful infringement because we'll just blame it on the computer. We can't be expected to check every result, naturally -- there are only 10,000 of us and even if we spent all day every day policing abuses of our system it would never be enough. So really, you should just suck it up and let us keep the money. That's what everyone else does: we have the numbers to prove it.

nostrademons 17y ago
That's been the business model of nearly every successful startup, and several unsuccessful ones: Q[Facebook]: Isn't asking every teenager and 20-something to provide all their personal details, and then selling that to advertising partners, a massive privacy violation? A: Maybe! However, it will take years for that question to be resolved, and in the meantime every teenager and 20-something will happily provide those details so they can throw sheep at each other (and more importantly, hook up). You are, of course, welcome to not use FaceBook, but then your friends will stop talking to you and you will never get laid. Q[Youtube]: Isn't allowing anyone to upload video in seconds going to encourage massive copyright violation of all videos ever made? A: Maybe! However, it will take years for that question to be resolved in your favor in court. And Google over there has a vested interest in making certain that it will not be resolved in your favor. So before that happens, they will buy us for exorbitant amounts of money and sic their exorbitantly-priced lawyers on you. Q[Napster]: Isn't providing a peer-to-peer music service just a way to encourage massive copyright violation? A: Maybe! However, it will take years for that question to be resolved in your favor in court, and by then we'll be the world's most influential Internet company, and you'll still just be some sap with a web page. After we're a billion dollar company...oh shit, your lawyers are faster than we thought. Q[Craigslist]: Isn't an anonymous classified-ads website just going to be a haven for prostitutes to pick up clients? A: Maybe! However, chances are that whatever judge you get uses those prostitutes' services, because he is not on FaceBook and hence doesn't get laid. Case dismissed.
- patio11 17y ago
  After we're a billion dollar company...oh shit, your lawyers are faster than we thought. Thank you, I needed a good belly laugh today.

shrikant 17y ago

How will Google be disregarding the copyright claims? The Books Rights Registry [...] would oversee payments for authors arising from Google's use of the works [...] And why would you "go with Amazon"? They're shitting bricks that the the rightsholders (and publishers, as the case may be) might be able to screw Amazon out of their pricing power. Of course Amazon would want copyright changes via the US Congress - their lobbying would be more effective there. Amended copyright law in response to technological developments? DMCA, tyvm. And surely Amazon is large enough to be one of the "commercial or private entities" that could license the library rights from the Registry. Naaah, we'd just rather our current way of doing business is not threatened, now or ever..