Google Loses Significant Copyright Battle
(Page 1 of 4 )
Perfect 10's recent victory against Google points up the copyright vs. fair use issues that courts must struggle with as we come to grips with what Internet search technology makes possible. Keep reading for a point-by-point examination of these issues as they weighed into Judge Matz's ruling.
Google just lost a court battle that raises questions of fair use. United States District Judge A. Howard Matz ruled that the search engine’s image search feature, which displays thumbnail versions of photos found on websites, probably violates U.S. copyright law. The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed in 2004 by adult-oriented website Perfect 10. As a consequence of the ruling, Judge Matz is awarding Perfect 10 a preliminary injunction against Google. Lawyers on both sides of the case now have until March 8 to propose the wording of the injunction.
To those of us watching the situation, it’s almost surprising that someone hasn’t won an injunction against a search engine sooner. Don’t get me wrong; with the explosive expansion of the Internet, search engines perform a vital service. There is a lot of information online that is free for the viewing, probably the vast majority in fact. But even some of the free information is copyrighted, which means that it is subject to certain laws covering how it can and can’t be used. These laws vary to some degree by country (though there are international treaties concerning intellectual property).
The issue gets complicated whenever serious money is involved. To give you an example, I have a friend with a regular job who is a singer/songwriter on the side. He even has a number of albums out, which he produced himself, and has made some money off of those albums and some songbooks he also produced himself. Believe it or not, people have pirated his music. He’s of two minds about this. On the one hand, he’s not exactly happy about the loss of money; on the other hand, he sees that as a form of publicity, helping get the word out about his work. Maybe some of the people who stole his music will actually buy it later. So far, he’s happier that people are that interested in his music, but he might feel differently if he was trying to make a full-time living with his music.
This is probably one reason why we haven’t seen the kind of injunction Perfect 10 won against Google issued sooner. Search engines act as a form of publicity about copyrighted material, as any SEO knows, and the “buzz” might be more valuable than the money. But when the search engine itself effectively gives away material that the copyright holder is trying to sell, that may go beyond fair use. In the Perfect 10 vs. Google case, that’s part of the issue at stake.
Next: The Fair Use Issue >>
More Search Engine News Articles
More By Terri Wells
