кто ищет, тот найдет
12:23 | 18-05-2010 | Copyright, Google, Internet | 1 Comment
о том, как можно поплатиться за просто ссылки и, например, за торрент-файлы (которые тоже суть ссылки) уже было слишком много.
что ж, вот еще один взгляд на проблему:
In what seems like a role reversal, Google has filed a lawsuit against Blue Destiny Records in an attempt to assert that it has not infringed the record label’s copyrights.
<...>
Blue Destiny Records first sued Google for copyright infringment in December 2009 over links to copyrighted content hosted on Rapidshare. According to the new lawsuit (PDF) by Google, Blue Destiny Records intended to hold Google liable “for infringement of copyright by reason of the provider referring or linking users to an online location containing infringing material or infringing activity by using information location tools, including a directory, index, reference, pointer, or hypertext link”.
According to a Hollywood Reporter article by Eriq Gardner, that original suit cliamed that Rapidshare was running “‘a distribution center for unlawful copies of copyrighted works’ and that Google (and Microsoft’s Bing search engine) were helping to prop up the company.” Google states in this latest suit that it responded “expiditiously” to the record label’s Digital Millenium Copyright Act complaints “by removing, or disabling access to, links leading to webpages allegedly containing material infringing BDR’s copyrights” and that it should be protected by DMCA safe harbor.
<...>
It seems that Google wants to preserve its way of doing business, wherein its search engine can index without regard for copyright and only needs to act when a DMCA take-down notice is issued. A decision holding Google responsible for copyrighted content, which it pulled down after the notice, would mean that the company would need to be much more discriminatory in its indexing of content
т.е., ссылки на противоправно распространяемые материалы, охраняемые авторским правом, Google все-таки будет убирать. но при этом хочет, чтобы сам факт их существования не вменяли ему в вину.
иными словами, незаконность подобных ссылок поисковой гигант все-таки признает. и оспаривать этот факт не собирается.
а между тем как раз в этом и заключаются основные, на мой взгляд, ограничения, которые пытаются навязать нам так называемые правообладатели:
Should links be criminalized? Or should this sort of copyright infringement claim be reserved for actual hosting of content? And as we asked when we looked at the case of DMCA take-downs and Twitter, how many degrees of separation must there be before a link is no longer a criminal act? If we link to Google, which links to Rapidshare, which is hosting the content, should we also be held accountable for infringing copyright?
вот именно.
[…] ссылки опять признали нарушением закона: Yesterday, the Court of Amsterdam decided that […]