Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Wins a Court Battle

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the justice-served dept.

Gosalia wrote to let us know about an article which opens with: "In a legal win for Google, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by a writer who claimed the search giant infringed on his copyright by archiving a Usenet posting of his and providing excerpts from his Web site in search results." Thankfully, we can all still read Usenet articles on Google as well as other archive services.

7 of 272 comments (clear)

  1. Gtalk by skaet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Can't wait until people try to sue Google for saving their Gtalk conversations....

    --
    There is no knowledge that is not power.
    1. Re:Gtalk by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Which in turn makes it easier to prove it was you who sent the message, for example if your partner later decides to betray you.

      You wouldn't use a private key, for Pete's sake - you'd use symmetric encryption. You, your accomplice, and an unverifiably large set of strangers would all know the shared passphrase, and each of you could plausibly deny that the other encrypted it.

      If you're going to conspire, you'll have to be more clever than that.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  2. They won the battle ... by arrrrg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    but the war is still to come. It's interesting to contrast this with their recent loss against Perfect 10. Compared to the lawsuits from the publishers and the US government, this one seems like an easy victory.

  3. Re:Strange Decision by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Archiving and redistributing aren't the same thing.

    Sure they are. Google just happens to run an NNTP server with a pretty interface and a long expiration time. There're tens of thousands of messages stored on my own server, reader for public distribution, at this very moment.

    What if I posted a licence with my content stating that only nntp servers and individuals could redistribute what I have posted?

    As long as we're throwing out goofy ideas: what if I scream into a restaurant that no one is allowed to tell anyone else what I'm about to say?

    When you contract with a carrier of a wide-open public medium to deliver your message to the world, you have no right to expect that another carrier of that medium won't deliver to someone you didn't expect, or in a form you didn't anticipate.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  4. Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My jaw dropped when I started reading this article... I was surprised that this guy has made the news.

    Gordon Roy Parker is the resident troll on various Usenet groups. He has been around for years, and alternates between posting nonsense disguised as an informed opinion and accusing other posters of plagiarizing his writing. I think he may also sell an e-book about seduction.

    Here are some references

  5. Re:Strange Decision by Rakishi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Check court cases, there is the concept of implied license. For example, web browsers are given an implied license by web site owners to copy content for viewing purposes.

  6. Re:Cash Grab Suit? by jcr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To me, his suit smells like a cash grab.

    Got it on the very first guess!

    Gordon Roy Parker, to whom I usually refer as "grp" (rhymes with twerp), having nothing better to do, likes to waste the taxpayers' money on frivolous lawsuits like this one where he demanded ten billion(!) dollars from Google and fifty thousand(!) John Does for having archived a newsgroup. One of his other hilarious escapades was suing U. Penn for discrimination against him because he's a white male(!), when he didn't even apply for a job there!

    He's up for a lifetime "Balsa Gavel" award in alt.usenet.kooks.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."