Madame Marie Curie - 144th birthday

If Marie Curie were to be alive today, she would have been a grand old lady of 144 years-old. The above is Google's doodle to commemorate Madame Curie's 144th birthday. She died on July 4, 1944.

Marie Skłodowska Curie (7 November 1867 – 4 July 1934) was a Polish–French physicist–chemist famous for her pioneering research on radioactivity. She was the first person honored with two Nobel Prizes —in physics and chemistry. She was the first female professor at the University of Paris. She was the first woman to be entombed on her own merits (in 1995) in the Paris Panthéon.
More on Wikipedia

Preview Pictures II (Google Thumbnails)

In a judgment handed down yesterday, the Bundesgerichtshof (BGH) confirmed and expanded its position on Google thumbnails. In last year's 'Vorschaubilder' (preview pictures) decision (BGH I ZR 69/08, see Birgit's IPKat post here), the BGH held that Google's image search service does not infringe copyright in the pictures shown as 'thumbnails' in the search results. Since the copyright owner in that case put the pictures on the web and failed to take any steps to prevent them from appearing in Google's image search (which I understand is easy to do), she was deemed to have granted an implied licence for the pictures to be made available to the public by appearing in Google's image search results.

Now the court went a step further. The factual scenario was as follows: The copyright owner, a photographer, gave permission to someone else to make one of his photographs available on the Internet, presumably without requiring to take technical steps to prevent the photograph from appearing in Google's image search results (the written judgment is not available yet, and the press release is not entirely clear on this). Third parties then copied the photograph and made it available on their own websites. Google image search results then showed the photograph linking to the third parties' websites. The copyright owner complained and later sued Google, but to no avail.

The BGH considered that a search engine cannot distinguish pictures made available with the copyright owner's permission from those made available without the copyright owner's permission. It concluded that since the copyright owner gave someone permission to make his work available on the Internet, he is deemed to have given Google an implied licence to use the work in its image search service no matter what, even if the source of the preview picture is a website whose operator is in breach of copyright for making the work in question available.

Very kindly, though, the BGH pointed out that the copyright owner is free to sue those for copyright infringement who unlawfully made the images available on the Internet. Times were when one might have thought that would go without saying...

I agree that Google did not infringe copyright, but I confess to being confused nonetheless. If the third parties made the photograph available on their websites without permission and are thus infringing copyright, why is Google upon notification of the copyright owner not required under the principles of 'Störerhaftung' (secondary liability for contributing to someone else's breach of rights) to remove the photograph from its image search service as far as those websites are concerned? Surely it must be possible to exclude the third parties' websites from the image search while keeping the thumbnail from the website of the legitimate licensee?

Any comments by our dear readers would be very welcome.

Gumby and Friends on Google doodle

Google today pays tribute to Art Clokey turning 90 if he were to be alive today. Art was the creator of Gumby, the green clay figure.

Google’s home page features a unique interactive stop motion clay doodle created by the Clokey Productions Premavision studios. The doodle features some of Clokey's characters popping out from balls of clay.

A few short Gumby videos for your viewing pleasure.. Enjoy!






And a Montage

Why did Google launch its cloud service without licences?

I’ve been sitting on a story from BusinessWeek from two months ago when the magazine reported that Google offered the major record labels $100 million to obtain licenses for its new cloud music service, but that one of the reasons that talks broke down was that the labels wanted Google to be more proactive in the fight against digital piracy. Google then launched a cloud locker service – without licences - and the legality of that has yet to be tested in the US courts. It is also interesting that Google filed a Amici curiae brief back in January in support of the defendant in the main case looking at this issue, EMI v MP3Tunes. MP3tunes operates a digital cloud “locker” service and is being sued by the major labels.



CNET asks why the labels would pass up big dollars for antipiracy considerations. Whether the story is true or not, it is clear that the large entertainment companies are trying to pressure Google to make changes – and the news of the new scheme brokered in the USA with the major ISPs means to me that this story makes more sense now. As the top Internet search engine, Google is believed to be in a position to make it more to difficult to find pirated materials online, for example the company's ads are often found on sites accused of trafficking in pirated or counterfeited materials. To be fair, Google has already agreed to a series of changes, and those include booting alleged copyright violators off AdSense, and blocking terms associated with piracy from appearing in the search engine's Autocomplete function, but maybe the record labels and other content providers recent success with ISPs in the USA mean that they are now prepared to take a tougher line when it comes to Google’s current stance.



Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20066799-261.html#ixzz1NdejMtcs and see US content industry and ISPs agree to be alert in Music Law Updates, August 2011 www.musiclawupdates.com and see http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2011/01/cloud-is-future-google-joins-eff-in.html



Capitol Records, LLC. et al v MP3Tunes, LLC., and Michael Robertson

No. 07 Civ 9931 United States District Court Southern District of New York

Google chair says he will fight website blocking legislation

Google’s executive chairman Eric Schmidt has said that the internet search engine giant will oppose anti-piracy efforts on both sides of the pond in the USA and the United Kingdom. Schmidt singled out provisions in the USA’s PROTECT IP Act and the Digital Economy Act in the U.K. where provisions could allow governments to block access to websites that host infringing content or sell counterfeit goods with Schmidt saying “If there is a law that requires DNSs [domain name systems] to do X and it’s passed by both houses of congress and signed by the president of the United States and we disagree with it then we would still fight it.” Speaking at the company’s Big Tent conference in London he added “If it’s a request the answer is we wouldn’t do it, if it’s a discussion we wouldn’t do it.”

The blogsphere took Schmidt’s comments as support for sites such as The Pirate Bay and Newzbin2 with Torrentfreak saying that both sites are at the very top of the domain-blocking wishlists of both the U.S. and UK, but neither of them are in ideal positions to mount legal challenges of their own.

Schimdt went on to compare the notion of website blocking with methods used by the Chinese to censor the Internet, cautioning that when those further east see that the west aren’t opposed to censorship when it comes to achieving their particular aims, it might only encourage further crackdowns saying “I would be very, very careful if I were a government about arbitrarily [implementing] simple solutions to complex problems,” Schmidt said. “So, ‘let’s whack off the DNS’. Okay, that seems like an appealing solution but it sets a very bad precedent because now another country will say ‘I don’t like free speech so I’ll whack off all those DNSs’ – that country would be China.”

In a follow-up statement to Schmidt’s comments, Google told CNET that, “Free expression is an issue we care deeply about, and we continue to work closely with Congress to make sure the Protect IP Act will target sites dedicated to piracy while protecting free expression and legitimate sites.”

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20063963-261.html

http://torrentfreak.com/google-boss-well-fight-anti-piracy-blocking-laws-110519/

Google doodle: Honoring Martha Graham

Another animated Google doodle today. This time to honor someone who made a difference in the performing arts, Martha Graham. See the little performance on google.com.

Some information from Wikipedia..

Martha Graham (May 11, 1894 – April 1, 1991) was an American dancer choreographer regarded as one of the foremost pioneers of modern dance, whose influence on dance can be compared to the influence Stravinsky had on music, Picasso had on the visual arts, or Frank Lloyd Wright had on architecture.[1] Graham was a galvanizing performer, a choreographer of astounding moves. She invented a new language of movement, and used it to reveal the passion, the rage and the ecstasy common to human experience. She danced and choreographed for over seventy years, and during that time was the first dancer ever to perform at The White House, the first dancer ever to travel abroad as a cultural ambassador, and the first dancer ever to receive the highest civilian award of the USA: the Medal of Freedom. In her lifetime she received honors ranging from the key to the City of Paris to Japan's Imperial Order of the Precious Crown. She said, "I have spent all my life with dance and being a dancer. It's permitting life to use you in a very intense way. Sometimes it is not pleasant. Sometimes it is fearful. But nevertheless it is inevitable."

Image above is of Martha Graham, shown here with Bertram Ross

Google Doodle - Charlie Chaplin's 122nd Birthday

Google has done it again! If you go to Google.com today, you'd notice a movie doodle,, Google's way of celebrating Charlie Chaplin's 122nd birthday if he were to be alive today. Click on the doodle to watch a video. Nice..

What's Your Favorite Ice Cream Sundae?

Thanks to Google (yet again), we all know a little bit more about the ice cream sundae. Today is the 119th anniversary of the first documented ice cream sundae. If you use Google.com today, you would see this pretty doodle.

With the advent of Sundae, ice cream is never viewed in the same light again. The Sundae, this appetizing ice cream dessert typically consists of a scoop of ice cream topped with sauce or syrup, and in some cases other toppings including chopped nuts, sprinkles, whipped cream, or maraschino cherries.

You can practically create your very own sundae with the many toppings and syrups available or make one from the already famous sundaes such as the Classic Sundae, Hot fudge sundae, Brownie sundae or a Banana Split.

The Classic Sundae is the original sundae. It is vanilla ice cream topped with a flavored sauce or syrup, whipped cream, and maraschino cherry. These sundaes are typically named for their flavored syrup, cherry sundae, chocolate sundae, strawberry sundae etc. Soft serve ice cream is often used instead of regular ice cream.

Wanna make a Banana Split? Nothing to it. It is..
Three sundaes in one, side by side between two halves of a banana, sliced lengthwise. Includes strawberry ice cream topped with strawberry syrup, chocolate ice cream topped with chocolate syrup, and vanilla ice cream topped with crushed pineapple. Each scoop is individually garnished with whipped cream and a cherry.

And finally, the most expensive ice cream sundae in the world is at a price of 1,000 U.S. dollars. It is the Serendipity Golden Opulence Sundae, sold by Serendipity 3 restaurant in New York City. The dessert consists of five scoops of Tahitian vanilla bean ice cream infused with Madagascar vanilla, covered in 23-carat edible gold leaf, rare Amedei Porcelana and Chuao chocolate, American Golden caviar, passion fruit, orange, Armagnac, candied fruits from Paris, marzipan cherries, and decorated with real gold dragées. The sundae is served in a baccarat Harcourt crystal goblet with an 18-karat gold spoon.

Back to reality, what's your favorite ice cream sundae?


Source: Wikipedia

A tip to increase traffic to your site

Google has a nice doodle today. It's to honour Robert Bunsen who would have been 200 today if he were still alive. Does the name ring a bell? Bunsen? Something to do with science?

Robert Bunsen, the German scientist who developed the Bunsen burner.

What else is happening around the world today? Libya is still worrisome, so is the nuclear leakage in Japan, floods in Perlis, mudslide in Krabi, Thailand, and tourists had to be helped out to safety on Tao Island. McD served its last breakfast this morning. The outlets must have been crowded with long queues. And traffic to my sites seeking printable vouchers has also tapered off.

I'm no expert on SEO but I must be doing something right on keywords in the title of the posts. I read that keywords in the title can get your post/blog listed higher up on the SERPs (Search Engine Results Pages) meaning that your post appears higher up in the page of search results. Research has shown that chances of people clicking on your site are much higher when you are listed on top, preferably above the fold on page 1.

Google logo today, Feb 8 - Jules Verne

Google has an interesting logo today on its website. It is to commemorate the birthday of Jules Verne.

From Wikipedia,
Jules Gabriel Verne (French pronunciation: [ʒyl vɛʁn]; February 8, 1828 – March 24, 1905) was a French author from Brittany who pioneered the science-fiction genre. He is best known for novels such as Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea (1870), A Journey to the Center of the Earth (1864), and Around the World in Eighty Days (1873). Verne wrote about space, air, and underwater travel before air travel and practical submarines were invented, and before practical means of space travel had been devised. He is the third most translated individual author in the world, according to Index Translationum. Some of his books have been made into films. Verne, along with Hugo Gernsback and H. G. Wells, is often popularly referred to as the "Father of Science Fiction".

The image is in the form of a series of portholes in an underwater vessel - what else! On the right is a joystick which you can manoever in four different directions to view the sea life. You will notice that the lower you go, the darker it gets. Very cool! Quick, get on to Google.com. This is what it looks like.

As "digital theft" grows, can the content empire strike back?

A new survey in the US commissioned by NBC Universal shows that 23.8% of global Internet traffic involves "digital theft," with the BitTorrent file-sharing protocol accounting for 11.4% of this figure. Brand and trademark monitoring firm Envisional's analysis of the top 10,000 peer-to-peer swarms found that 99.24% of non-pornographic material being traded was copyrighted material. It also found that "infringing cyberlocker sites" accounted for 5.1% of global Internet traffic, while "infringing video streaming sites" made up 1.4% of global traffic.

With that statistic in mind, it still seems surprising to this writer that nearly 100,000 North Americans have been sued for suspected copyright infringement on file-sharing networks over the past twelve months according to details of a study published by TorrentFreak. Again, the majority are alleged to have utilised BitTorrent, although some users of eDonkey were also targeted. The 99,924 defendants were sued as part of a total of just 80 lawsuits, which seek the identities of the many "John Doe" defendants from their various Internet service providers. Some 70,914 case are active and the porn industry is now having to take steps to protect its hitherto much admired internet economic model - nearly all of the recently-filed cases target alleged downloaders of adult content although the mainstream movie industry is actively represented too, against users who have illegally downloaded feature films such as "The Hurt Locker"

Torrentfreak say “through these mass lawsuits the copyright holders are trying to obtain the personal details of (mostly) BitTorrent users who allegedly shared their material online. Once this information is handed over, they then offer the defendant the opportunity to settle the case for a few hundred up to a couple of thousand dollars, thereby avoiding a full trial and potentially even bigger financial penalties”. I find myself reminded of comments from my blog on ACS:law last week (25th January) when Torrentfreak comments “One of the main points of critique is that the copyright holders have no intention of going to a full trial against each of the defendants. They are out to get a settlement, which means that the (possibly weak) evidence will never be tested in court. Two weeks ago the EFF filed an amicus brief in which it asked an Illinois judge to quash subpoenas issued in pay-up-or-else lawsuits involving alleged illegal file-sharing of pornography, with EFF Intellectual Property Director Corynne McSherry saying “Copyright owners have a right to protect their works, but they can’t use shoddy and unfair tactics to do so,” adding “We’re asking the court to protect the rights of each and every defendant, instead of allowing these copyright trolls to game the system.”

It also appears that Google has responded pressure from the entertainment industries by implementing active censors for “piracy related” terms including BitTorrent, torrent, utorrent, RapidShare and Megaupload from its instant and autocomplete services. BitTorrent Inc., RapidShare and Vodo have all spoken out against “commercial censorship”. Among the list of forbidden keywords are “uTorrent” and “BitTorrent” and these keywords will no longer be suggested by Google when the first letter is entered, nor will they show up in Google Instant and all combinations of the word “torrent”

http://torrentfreak.com/100000-p2p-users-sued-in-us-mass-lawsuits-110130/


http://torrentfreak.com/google-starts-censoring-bittorrent-rapidshare-and-more-110126/

Jothys Fish Head Curry Restaurant sues blogger and Google

The Star today carries an article of a Malaysian blogger and Google being sued for defamation by a director of a curry fish head restaurant in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah. The restaurant is recommended by Lonely Planet.

Excerpts from The Star..
Jothys Sdn Bhd director Tharumaraj Sivaperumal filed a RM6mil civil suit at the Kota Kinabalu High Court, naming blogger Poh Huai Bin as the first defendant and California-based Google Inc as the second defendant.

Tharumaraj said he felt very let down when the blogger demeaned his fish head curry and banana leaf restaurant and urged the people to “avoid it like a bad case of herpes”.

The company is also seeking an order from the court to remove the offending articles from Google and other popular search engines used on the Internet.

Read full article..Google and blogger sued by curry fish head restaurant

Related article:
Google to retain ‘offensive’ contents on fish head curry outlet

The cloud is the future - Google joins the EFF in MP3tunes' battle against EMI

Google have reportedly filed a paper with the New York District Court in support of MP3tunes.com in its ongoing legal battle with EMI, joining The Electronic Frontiers Foundation who had previously filed an Amici curiae brief in support of the company and its founder Michael Robertson. MP3tunes provides an online music “locker” service where users can store their music and access it from computers and mobile devices. MP3tunes also operates a music search engine called Sideload where users can find music tracks on other sites and then put them in their locker. EMI says the service makes mass copyright infringement easy by letting users upload music they didn’t buy and providing links to online songs that users can then “sideload” into their library and EMI claims that digital locker service such as MP3tunes infringes copyright unless licensed by rights holders . Robertson unsurprisingly argues that EMI’s position is an incorrect interpretation of copyright law saying that MP3tunes is shielded from liability by the “safe harbor” provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act - because it doesn’t encourage copyright infringement and promptly removes infringing content when notified but EMI. Applying for summary judgment, said that “This case is about defendants’ unlawful exploitation of copyrights they do not own to advance their own business interests,” saying “Defendants’ plan was simple: Steal assets, build up a user base, and sell the company before copyright owners could obtain a judgment and shut the service down.” Robertson is a veteran of digital companies. He first tangled with the music industry a decade ago with his previous company, MP3.com which, whilst it was successfully sued by the major record labels, was brought by Universal Music. Last year Robertson sold his web based calling startup company Gizmo5 to Google for $30 million.

The case may well have an important bearing on the future of similar services and Google’s move is seen by some as confirmation of the web’s leading search engine’s (and owners of YouTube expanding) ambitions in the digital content space with a move to these called digital or “cloud-based” lockers and it is widely believed that when Google launches its long awaited music offer, a cloud based digital MP3 storage facility will be at its core.

EMI, which is one of a number of claimants brining the action, have already asked a New York federal judge to bar the EFF from filing their friend-of-the-court. EMI says the brief, supporting MP3tunes argument that it’s not responsible for what music its users store on its servers should be barred because it is “a pure advocacy piece, not a ‘friend of the court” further arguing that EFF’s brief is too long, thereby “circumventing” the court’s “page restrictions” causing “additional burden” to the court and “prejudice” to the EMI. Because EFF’s brief supports MP3tunes, EMI says, its arguments are “duplicative” and should not be allowed. In addition, EMI says, EFF’s brief “contains unsupported speculation that is not helpful to the Court”. The US Consumer Electronics Association, Home Recording Rights Coalition and IP lobbying group Public Knowledge are also expected to support MP3tunes in the case – EMI is joined as a plaintiff by a number of record labels and music publishers including Capitol Records, EMI Virgin songs and Jobete Music and has the support of the Recording Industry Association of America.

Although Google is thought to be talking to the four majors and big indie labels about licensing its digital music offer, Google must clearly recognise the importance of a win for MP3tunes for the future of cloud computing ansd one which would free them from the legal necessity of dealing with record labels, music publishers and collection societies. When the EFF launched their amicus brief, EFF senior staff attorney Corynne McSherry said ”The DMCA safe harbors were designed to encourage the growth of new internet innovations and expression by helping service providers manage their legal exposure, and they’ve been an extraordinary success,” adding “Without the safe harbor provisions, companies like YouTube, Facebook, and many others could have been shut down before they got off the ground. That’s not what Congress intended.”

Commenting on Google's submission Robertson told P2Pnet last week: "Since Google has bet their entire future on the cloud it's not a surprise to see them supporting MP3tunes. This will be a defining case about the future of cloud services" and told Wired.com “This case will define digital-media ownership in the 21st century” adding “Can companies assist their consumers in storing their possessions on the cloud where they can control them? That’s the issue at stake.”

Capitol Records, LLC. et al v MP3Tunes, LLC., and Michael Robertson
No. 07 Civ 9931 United States District Court Southern District of New York

EFF brief of amici curiae http://www.wired.com/epicenter/tag/eff/

Viacom lodge Google appeal

Viacom will appealed in the $1 billion copyright infringement lawsuit it brought against Google's YouTube in 2007, which a federal judge dismissed earlier this year. U.S. District Judge Louis Stanton ruled in June that YouTube should be considered a service provider under the provisoins of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), and therefore not liable for copyright infringements committed by users of the service under the 'safe harbour' principle. Judge Stanton also noted YouTube's good faith efforts to remove copyrighted videos when presented with valid takedown notices from copyright holders (http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2010/06/youtube-wins-viacom-copyright-suit.html) It is understood that Viacom's appeal, argues that Judge Stanton ignored the fact that YouTube knew it was hosting copyrighted material, but did nothing because that copyrighted content was attracting more viewers than its user-generated videos.

http://www.dmwmedia.com/news/2010/12/03/viacom-files-appeal-1-billion-youtube-copyright-lawsuit and see the IPKat at http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2010/06/breaking-news-google-wins-1-billion.html

T-Mobile G2 With Google is 4G

T-Mobile has upped the ante on smartphone performance with the introduction of the G2. The “G” in G2 stands for Google. That means integrated access to Google Voice, which can automatically transcribe voice mails to text so you can read them like an email or text message.

The G2 is also an Android phone, running Android 2.2. It has a 3.7 inch full touch screen with 7 customizable home panels. You can download thousands of apps and widgets from the Android Market to customize your smartphone. It’s just one click away.

Here are some more interesting features about the T-Mobile G2. Unlike a certain other smartphone that will remain nameless (think: it keeps the doctor away), the G2 is enabled with an Adobe Flash Player. It also comes with a slide out full QWERTY keyboard that opens and closes using unique “z-hindge”. That means real keys for fast and sure text entry rather than tapping on the glass to write your messages.

But what about the 4G? Is that WiMAX or LTE? Neither one. T-Mobile is leapfrogging the other 4G players by rolling out HSPA+ (High Speed Packet Access). It’s a GSM technology that has been evolving for years rather than something completely new. As such, T-Mobile expects to have it available in 100 major markets serving 200 million people by the end of the year.

But is it fast? It screams. Theoretical peak download speeds are up to 21 Mbps, with peak upload speeds up to 5.7 Mbps. In actual service, you probably won’t see that much bandwidth, perhaps a third of those peak values, but it is enough of an advance from 3G to deserve the 4G designation.

What else does the T-Mobile G2 have that’s eye-opening? The digital camera is a 5.0 Megapixel model that includes auto-focus and HD video capability. You can record HD videos in 720 resolution. Send and receive picture and video messages using multimedia messaging. Or, stay with SMS text messaging, IM, or email, as your fingers fly on that QWERTY keyboard.

There are, of course, the usual multimedia niceties that we’ve come to expect in smartphones. The MP3 player supports MP3, AAC, eAAC+, WMA, MPEG4, WAV and MIDI formats. There’s an FM radio on-board in case you tire of your tunes collection or want to catch the latest news and sports scores. Social networks are easily accessible. You can get to Twitter, Facebook and MySpace quickly. After all, quick is the name of the game in social networking. If you must work, then you’ll have attachment viewing of Word, Excel and PowerPoint files with Word and Excel editing possible with apps from the Android Market.

Is G2 the one for you? If so, learn more and order your T-Mobile G2 Android phone with service at a terrific online discount.

Of course, you can shop to your heart’s content for Android and other smartphones plus standard cell phone models. They’re all available discounted or even free at Cell Phone Plans Finder now.

If there is no net neutrality, is there now a new net liability?

One of the recent gripes from the music industry is that as the internet has developed, internet service providers (ISPs), link sites and search engines have profited hugely from the illegal and infringing activities of their users, with ‘free’ music massively driving up site visits and traffic on the net. The games, TV and film industries see themselves next in line as broadband rolls out across the globe. The content owners also blame the ISPs, links sites and search engines of doing little or nothing to halt this huge flow of data, sometimes criticising ‘safe habour’ provisions in legislation (eg in the USA and European Community) for giving ISPs near blanket protection as ‘dumb pipes’ whose role is simply to facilitate the delivery of data. It hasn’t all gone the way of the ISPs, links sites and search engines and MGM v Grokster was a wake up call, although most link sites still feel safe behind the protection of the detail of the US Supreme Court’s judgment and ‘fair use’ cases such as Google v Perfect 10. This is of course which is why record labels and other content owners have so readily embraced the so called ‘three strikes’ laws in Taiwan, France, New Zealand, South Korea and the UK, not least as it puts at least a limited obligation on ISPs to police their customers traffic and take relevant action over repeat infringers.

News of the new commercial tie up between Google and ISP Verizon made me think again. In the new deal, Verizon appear to be agreeing to prioritise Google’s internet traffic – removing so called “Net Neutrality” where all data is considered equal, and allowing Google’s information to move faster and more efficiently around the globe. But surely if an ISP can prioritise information in this way, they move from being a dumb pipe to a very smart pipe indeed – and surely this must lead to the conclusion that if they can ‘prioritise’ traffic (if paid) they could also do the reverse – and easily block infringing material. Of course asking an ISP to block or filter material brings up a host of question relating to human rights, censorship and privacy BUT – it does at least give the content owners some new ammunition in the fight to monetise their copyrights – and might take away one of the main props used by ISPs to excuse themselves from engaging in policing the web.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/aug/05/google-verizon-net-neutrality
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_10,_Inc._v._Google_Inc

BPI warns Google over search links

BPI, the UK recording industry’s trade association has sent a cease-and-desist letter to Google, asking the search engine to take down links to nine "one-click hosting" sites, each of which hosts thousands of illegal songs. The BPI cite 38 links "that are available via Google's search engine, and [requests these] links be removed as soon a possible as they directly link to sound recordings owned by [BPI] members". Simple Google search queries such as keying in artist and song names and then a word like 'MP3', 'download', 'upload' or the name of a file-transfer service lead users to illegal downloads on pages of sites that includes MegaUpload, SendSpace and UserShare. Last October, Google removed links to the Pirate Bay – the infamous illegal BitTorrent tracker – from their search index. The BPI takedown request promoted much chatter online yesterday after it was leaked by the Chilling Effects website with some journalists and bloggers claiming this is a new more aggressive initiative on behalf of the BPI.

CMU Daily says that some commentators also note that the document includes not only a list of specific links to infringing content, but also a list of home page links to the services that have aided the infringement, such as MegaUpload, leading to additional speculation that the BPI is stepping beyond the strict remit of America's Digital Millennium Copyright Act and calling on Google to block access to whole website rather than just infringing content. The BPI has denied there is anything out of the ordinary about this takedown notice to Google and BPI Spokesman Adam Liversage told C-Net that such documents were filed with Google on a regular basis by bodies like the BPI and that "in most cases, Google takes down the links in question, following its own internal procedures".

In more encouraging news for the recorded music sector, The Black Eyed Peas' track 'I Gotta Feeling' has become the first ever single to be downloaded more than one million times in the UK.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2010/jun/22/google-bpi
http://chillingeffects.org/dmca512c/notice.cgi?NoticeID=40373

Google asks the questions ....

Google has taken the somewhat unusual step of asking a California judge to declare that it is not liable for copyright infringement, simply by linking to copyright-infringing works on Rapidshare. The move arose afterthe action brought by Blue Destiny Records last year alleging that the search engine and others were liable. Google is keen to establish that it is not facilitating the illegal distribution of copyrighted songs.

In 2009, the small blues label sued Google, Microsoft and Rapidshare in Florida, claiming that Rapidshare was running "a distribution centre for unlawful copies of copyrighted works," and that Google and Microsoft's Bing search engine were helping to prop up the company. The label argued that users could easily find copyrighted songs on file-hosting websites by doing a simple Google or Bing search. Whilst the suit was then withdrawn, Blue Destiny refused to waive its rights, preserving its option to re-file its claims.

Now Google has decided that it wants a court to decide the issue and the Company has filed a 96-page complaint with the California district court, asking for a declaratory judgment that it's not infringing Blue Destiny's copyrights. It seems to be a clever move and Billboard Magazine points out that the label is now on the back foot, facing a major court case on an important issue – and that “Google gets a more favorable jurisdiction than a Florida court. The Ninth Circuit has been friendly to Google in similar litigation with Perfect 10, an adult entertainment publisher that tried to punish search engines for indexing copyrighted photos”.

http://links.assetize.com/links/1f4b53

FCC Confiscates Remaining TV Channels For Twitter

Shocked and horrified by the geometrically expanding demand for wireless broadband services, the Federal Commfiscation Commission exercised its powers of eminent domain today and confiscated the remaining broadcast television channels not already sold at auction. Most surprising of all was the declaration that this rare and important spectrum is going to be dedicated exclusively to the text messaging service, Twitter.

FCC Chairman Lowon B. Andwidth explained that the Commission just completed an intensive study of Internet usage and found that the Twitter service is growing at such an astonishing rate that it will soon devour all available bandwidth. “While it is bad enough that Twitter will bring web browsing, video streaming, text messaging and email to a halt,” said Mr. Andwidth, “a far worse situation will occur when Twitter users have to take a number and get in line to post their tweets. I don’t want to be in Washington when that mob of anti-social networkers descends on Capitol Hill.”

In shortest supply is wireless bandwidth. Apparently, the lion’s share of cellular phone activity involves posting messages to Twitter rather than the growth previously expected from mobile video and web browsing. One young smartphone user was heard to exclaim, “Does anyone actually surf the Web anymore? Who has the patience to read blogs and web pages? Anything worth saying can be said in 140 characters or less.”

Twitter itself issued a 130 character statement expressing delight at the government’s pre-emptive action to prevent a massive Fail Whale epidemic from sweeping the nation, and requesting re-tweets. They vowed to expand server capacity to match the new wireless bandwidth capacity as best they can. TV stations that follow Twitter have already been tweeted to cease broadcasting immediately and return their licenses. The remaining stations will be getting old school telegrams. “It’s unlikely anyone will be inconvenienced by this change,” explained Chairman Andwidth. “Everybody is on cable and satellite by now, anyway.”

Expectations are that a swift coordinated move by the public and private sectors can ensure adequate messaging capacity at least until after the fall elections. After that, the FCC will likely look at shutting down other less important uses of the electromagnetic spectrum including most AM and FM music stations. “We may even have to shut down microwave ovens and garage door openers if we can’t keep up with texting bandwidth demand,” exclaimed an obviously frustrated chairman.

Also making quick moves to protect its interests, Google announced that it is going to take over non-wireless Internet service by offering 1 Gbps fiber optic connections to every city that performed ridiculous stunts to try to win Google broadband service for its residents. “All other cities that didn’t make fools of themselves will be getting 10 Gbps Google Internet access free of charge,” according to an unofficial Google statement. It went on to say: “There is only one acceptable day for any foolishness and that is April 1.”

Viacom v Google - the gloves are off

Things have been a bit quiet in the Google vs Viacom legal spat, the $1 billion lawsuit which accuses Google of profiting from thousands of unauthorized copyrighted clips owned by Viasom that once appeared on YouTube. But the case documents have now been unsealed and the gloves are definitely off, with Google accusing Viacom’s lawyers of editing emails and Viacom claiming that Google and YouTube had developed "serial amnesia" during depositions and also for failing "to preserve and produce" key documents.

It seems that in Viacom's summary judgment motion filed last week, the company quoted Steve Chen, one of YouTube's co-founders, in an e-mail saying "Concentrate all our efforts in building up our numbers as aggressively as we can through whatever tactics, however evil." Now you could see why Viacom, as a content owner, might not like this. But it now seems what the email actually said was this: "If I were running the show, I'd say, we concentrate all of our efforts in building up our numbers as aggressively as we can through whatever tactics, however evil, i.e., scraping MySpace." Now that might be a blow for MySpace owners News Corp, but it hardly has the same meaning as the edited version presented by Viacom. On the other hand ...... Viacom claims that it has not received emails that should have been disclosed saying that Google hasn’t acted in good faith by failing to turn over documents. Viacom's lawyers said that Google handed over only 19 records from June 2006, the month that Google began evaluating a YouTube acquisition. When Google boss Eric Schmidt was asked why a big acquisition like YouTube didn't generate more paperwork he answered that "(It) has been my practice for 30 years to not retain my e-mails unless asked specifically” adding "It was my practice to delete or otherwise cause the e-mails that I had read to go away as quickly as possible." YouTube boss and founder Chad Hurley told Viacom lawyers that he "lost" his e-mails for the period because of a computer crash. Viacom, however, retrieved many of Hurley's e-mails from the personal computer of Jawed Karim, another one of YouTube's three co-founders. When Hurley was presented with copies of those e-mails Viacom claims that the YouTube CEO "developed serial amnesia."


http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20001015-261.html

Picture at http://www.techshout.com/internet/2007/16/viacom-to-introduce-video-venture-challenges-youtube/