[conspire] Book Burning continues thanks to the Feds

Ruben Safir ruben at mrbrklyn.com
Wed Mar 23 05:04:09 PDT 2011

> At least you don't have a Scandinavian surname, or you'd be _really_
> getting the sharp edge if my tongue, chaver Ruben.  ;->  (But hey, I
> believe I've served you lingonberries at my house, so you're hereby
> declared honorary Norwegian.  Welcome!)
I believe the lingonberries were quite dilicious

> > Secondly, that's not what Google did.  They scanned books
> > largely out of print adn unlocked that wealth of information.  It should
> > be allowed wether the authors wish it or not.
> Sorry, this _doesn't even contradict_ what I said.  

Yes - but it was recognized by the court as a factor, Chin just didn't
think it was important enough because he has his head up his tuchas,

> > Further, the settlement would not have prevented another company from
> > likewise scanning books, especailly out of print works and doing the
> > same.
> Untrue unless you mean 'and thereby commit copyright violation and risk
> owing huge damages'.  

They are lazy.  Anyone can scan it.  There is no copyright violation in
scanning it no matter how much twittle-bots wanted the court to bring
Google to bankrupcy because they had the nerve to scan whole libaries
for the first time, which until now had no public access.  And a lot of
those works, it turned out, ended up being lost Jewish Religious works,
such as the Sifri.

> The right that would have been granted by the proposed (and now
> rejected) settlement to Google, Inc. made no provision whatsoever for
> any similar rights to any other party.  So, the only way 'another
> company' could have likewise 'scann[ed] books' and published them on the
> Internet without copyright holder permission would be for that second
> company to run the same infringement lawsuit gauntlet all over again,
> and find a second compliant judge.
> > Law that thinks about this as "property" needs to be reversed and google
> > should start to lobby for a change in the law.
> Maybe yes, maybe no, but completely irrelevant to present discussion.

It is essential to the current discussion.  Google's approach to this
has been naive.  As soon as the lawsuites began they should have
invested in a change in the copyright law to make it more explicit in
protecting the public interest.  The courts are not reliable as a
current venue of change and google's legal stratergy should have been to
bankrupt the opposition in legal fees and lobby the death out of
congress for legal change, and thereby undermine their legal standing.
It is a common business tactic.  Bring change on the ground and make the
government catch up.

> Finally, I notice you have so far disregarded my other serious points,
> e.g., the summary jettisoning in the now-rejected settlement of
> antitrust concerns, censorship protection, and privacy.  Sorry to see
> that. 

The only antitrust that concerns me is the one there publishers prevent
the publics access to information.  Currently publishers censor, and
invade privacy and ingage in antitust activities.  The very nature of
copyright creates an anti-competitive and monopolistic quagmire which
Google largely unlocks.

> [1] History's first recorded instance of two-factor authentication:
> Sefer Shoftim 12:5-6.  Fortunately, I have an excellent Gileadic accent.

I'll look into it.  But under current Copyright, the Gemora could even
come into existence.

> -- 
> Rick Moen                        "A shprakh iz a dialekt mit an armey un flot."
> rick at linuxmafia.com                                -- Max Weinreich, linguist
> McQ!  (4x80)
> _______________________________________________
> conspire mailing list
> conspire at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/conspire

http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Interesting Stuff
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software

So many immigrant groups have swept through our town that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological proportions in the mind of the world  - RI Safir 1998

http://fairuse.nylxs.com  DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

"Yeah - I write Free Software...so SUE ME"

"The tremendous problem we face is that we are becoming sharecroppers to our own cultural heritage -- we need the ability to participate in our own society."

"> I'm an engineer. I choose the best tool for the job, politics be damned.<
You must be a stupid engineer then, because politcs and technology have been attached at the hip since the 1st dynasty in Ancient Egypt.  I guess you missed that one."

© Copyright for the Digital Millennium

More information about the conspire mailing list