Brian makes his case:
After reading this column by CNET's Charles Cooper and then following up with the reader comments on the TechDirt reaction to the article, I can't help but talk about this issue a little more in-depth. I've spoken about Google, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:GOOG) aggregation efforts before, and I continue to believe that if there is public information available on the Internet, anyone can point links to it in the lawful spirit of the Fair Use doctrine. This is exactly what Google News does continuously.
Google News is an aggregator that grabs headlines from news sources worldwide and puts a snippet of information on its website (not full-length content). This service helps connect people and businesses looking for information find information sources. Without Google's help, these connections would most likely not be made. There are positives for the consumer -- for Google and the end content producer -- nobody loses here. Yet, some companies in countries outside the U.S. that don't recognize U.S. laws (and they shouldn't obviously) have sued or are suing Google for actually helping customers find their content. These companies and countries think Google is just stealing, plain and simple. I say that is utter rubbish.
A comment from the TechDirt article says it loud and clear, and I agree completely:
"Did you know, for instance, that for decades libraries have maintained vast libraries of card files, with each card providing a hard copy reference to the location of a specific copyrighted work? The whole thing is coordinated under the auspices of a shadowy cartel that calls itself 'The Dewey Decimal System'. Any legislation that addresses Google needs to address these folks, as well." (credit: Jim Lipsey).
And, of course, Google News is not the only news aggregator involved in using Fair Use snippets of content in an aggregated fashion -- Yahoo! and Ask.com do this as well. A new age is bringing a less-solid understanding by those who seem to think that protecting links to their content -- which is public -- is a right they should have exclusivity on. Wrong. This is the Internet age, and it's not going to stop operating. Innovate or die is the motto that the tech industry was built on and still operates on. The status quo is DOA.
Melly's rebuttal:
Some of you may or may not know that I am Canadian. Many policies in Canada are half way in between "socialist Europe" and "capitalist U.S." as Cooper called the two in his article. As such, it is easier for me to understand both points of view, although my own, in this case, tends to go with the European one.
I was actually quite shocked to read the comment Brian has chosen to bring as the winner comment, the one to withstand all counter arguments. To compare 'The Dewey Decimal System', the classification system used by public libraries -- not public companies, mind you -- to Google News is to not see the difference between public services and self-serving ones.
While many may like Google News and the way it aggregates the news for them, Google does so for one reason only -- profit. Public libraries, on the other hand, classify books for the public benefit and for no other reason, yes, not even profit. The Fair Use agreement quite clearly states that the purpose of the use (the links and summaries) is important. Commercial and nonprofit or educational purposed are two very different uses.
I know America (hey we're pretty much just another state up here), so I know how easily accepted corporate power is. Especially if the public perceives that power to benefit them in some way. Just note Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s (NYSE:WMT) latest $4 generic drug program enthusiastic acceptance, even by governments. Wal-Mart's motives are clear, yet they are not questioned.
In a similar manner, Google's service is perceived to benefit the consumer. And if that's the case then it must be good, right? Well... I voiced my opinion and Brian voiced his. I'll let you decide on the rest.
Closing Bell: Economic Catapult for Thanksgiving & Black Friday (WMT, TGT, GRMN, GOOG, MSFT)
Deere up on Q4 earnings performance
Reid Hoffman: LinkedIn will go public (at some point)
