Slashdot Mirror
Google Wins Nude Thumbnail Legal Battle
eldavojohn writes "Google is currently fighting many fronts in its ability to show small images returned in a search from websites. Most recently, Google won the case against them in which they were displaying nude thumbnails of a photographer's work from his site. Prior to this, Google was barred from displaying copyrighted content, even when linking it to the site (owner) from its search results. The verdict: "Saying the District Court erred, the San Francisco-based appeals court ruled that Google could legally display those images under the fair use doctrine of copyright law." This sets a rather hefty precedence in a search engine's ability to blindly serve content safely under fair use."
If you don't want your page to show up in google, send the robot home. They actually honor that, ya know.
If you don't know how to use it, well, then maybe you should not display your content on the internet. It will survive without.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Is this really any different from a legal standpoint?
Yes, because now a court has ruled that it is legal.
If Google gets fair use, others will too. This helps to chip away at the damage the DMCA (and a few very uneducated court rulings) has done.
Main difference is the protection for text and video is the ability to fairly take a portion of the entire copyrighted piece. With a still photo, even though it's a smaller version, it's still the ENTIRE image, which on the surface seems to go against the definition of "All Rights Reserved". The question a court has to consider, is if that thumbnail, that smaller version, in any way detracts or takes away anything from the original (and not just commercial, there's an artistic value to it as well.) For this case, I think specifically as a search engine function, the court says meh, you're fine.
In fact, as a test of Fair Use, it isn't clear if the wholesale simple shrinking of an image to smaller size is in itself fair game, or if it is just within the specific context of a search engine.
Makes me wonder what this means for the Google Books thingamajig.
A thumbnail doesn't give you the full detail of a full-sized image. Try to scale it up and you get pixellated garbage.
np, Perfect 10 just has to send DMCA removal requests to the original sites...which they can easily find with Google image search.
What I'm wondering is why go after the intermediate? Google's providing them a wealth of information on infringers. Shut down the middleman you lose your path to the top. (bottom?) Seems to me Perfect 10's just (a) lazy and (b) looking for a quick buck. Go after the REAL infringers already.