Google News

One topic for tonight's class will be Google News, and the impact of the IceTV copyright decision on Google. For IceTV, see below.

Have a look at the following:

• Brussels decision
• Murdoch attacks Google
• Associated Press attacks Google
• NYTimes and Gatehouse

Recent US Copyright Case

"CBS's Internet unit won the right to use National Football League players' names and statistics for free in fantasy sports leagues it sponsors after a judge ruled the information is in the public domain. The ruling is the latest setback for professional sports leagues and players unions looking to control the fantasy market. "

Similar result to IceTV in Australia?

IceTV Judgment - copyright and electronic program guides

See Story in SMH.

Judgment on Austlii

Amazon and Copyright

See http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10196424-38.html

This week, an e-book Web site said Amazon.com invoked the 1998 law to prevent books from some non-Amazon sources from working on its Kindle reader.

Amazon sent a legal notice to MobileRead.com complaining that information relating to a computer utility written in the Python programming language "constitutes a violation" of the DMCA, according to a copy of the warning letter that the site posted. MobileRead.com is an e-book news and community site.

Google and NZ Copyright

Stepping into local New Zealand political debate for the first time, Google makes a submission on the draft ISP code of practice – and it doesn’t hold back, citing a rash of bogus copyright claims it has received in the US. In its opening salvo, the company says, "section 92A undermines the incredible social and economic benefits of the open and universally accessible internet, by providing for a remedy of account termination or disconnection that is disproportionate to the harm of copyright infringement online.”

The Secret Litigation

There is currently a copyright litigation regarding the DVD and best selling book, The Secret.

The Director, Drew Heriot, is suing Rhonda Byrne in Federal Court in Chicago. Byrne's Eastern European company, TS Productions, is suing Drew in Federal Court in Melbourne, Australia.

Although these cases do not directly concern the Internet, they raise interesting questions regarding jurisdiction and appropriate forum.

I am representing Drew Heriot.

See: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/26/arts/26secr.html
and
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24223394-5012694,00.html

Google wins a court battle

Today a US District Court judge ruled that Google did not violate copyright law when it automatically archived a posting on Usenet by Gordon Roy Parker and by providing excerpts from Parker's website in its search results.

Read a summary of the case here. The judgment is also available to read.

Google to put whole books online

From SiliconValley.com:

• Google is expanding its role in the publishing world from a search engine for books to a distributor making entire books available to read online.
  The company launched a new program Friday that allows traditional book publishers in the United States and Britain to sell and set the price for access to full copies of their books, Google spokeswoman Megan Lamb said Monday. Consumers who purchase the access cannot save copies of the books or individual pages to their computers and can view them only through a Web browser.
  "We are collaborating with publishers -- in response to demand from them -- to develop a suite of online tools that will enable publishers to experiment with new and innovative ways to generate more book revenue,'' Lamb said in an e-mail.
  The new program is open only to U.S. and U.K. publishers at this point.
  Several points remained unclear: whether Google would get a cut of the price paid for access to a book; whether customers who purchase access to books see advertising while they read the books; and whether independent authors will also one day sell full access to their books through the service.

Read the full article here.

Copyright and Google image search

This Modern Practice Feature article by Jason Allen Cody, "Copyright Clash Over Image Searches: An Imperfect Means to a Pornographic End?", summarises a recent decision of the US District Court for the Central District of California which held that Google’s display of thumbnails of Perfect 10’s copyrighted images does constitute direct infringement of Perfect 10's copyright in the image and that this display is not a "fair use".

Do you agree with the decision? How do you think the appeal will be decided? Do you agree with Cody's conclusion that, even if the decision is upheld on appeal, "the vitality of Web does not appear in jeopardy as a result of the district court’s decision"?