Like the proverbial irresistable force meeting the immoveable object.
Blizzard make spyware-thats-not-really-spyware, just to make sure no one's cheating (or perchance playing some other game).
Along comes Sony, trying desparately to keep people from listening to free music whilst ensuring that they can't listen to the music they paid for when they want and how they want.
And so these titans collide, as one's software can be used to bollix up the other's. Will there be lawsuits? Of course! And in the end, both companies will merge, combine their forces, and attack Google. This is so reminiscent of 1930s Germany. Please, let us annex the Sudetenland... we won't cause any trouble...
I don't see any difference between what Google are doing here and what they do to index web sites.
There is a big difference, in that copyright law exists to protect the author from abuse and or outright plagarism of their material. As an author and publisher I can see the argument here. It is fact technically illegal for you to copy a book using a photocopier, unless the material is for your own private use and not meant for commercial distribution. College professors routinely violate these rules when they photocopy and distribute copies of works for use in their classes. And what exactly gives Google the right to do this? Just as I didn't appoint TransUnion or Experian to keep track of my credit history, I didn't cede any of my rights to Google to allow them to access any of my published work. They have taken it upon themselves to do this and must suffer the legal backlash. To make this service available will require rewriting the laws.
Then again, because I am a science fiction writer/fan, I know that the idea is to make all information accessible to everyone. Google is on the right track, and no matter the outcome of any legal wrangles, will be seen as a pioneer in providing a unified, global resource for information distribution. Wouldn't it be nice to sit down with a Internet-connected, digital book plaque and call up any work you choose to? The only thing that I see as an impediment to a system like that is the requirement to make money. If authors and publishers didn't need to make money, they wouldn't be putting up much of a fuss.
Biometrics will eventually be the solution; it will be very hard to fake retinas, fingerprints, even biomagnetic signatures. This is of course until cloning becomes commonplace.
The fact is, for everything Man can create, Man can destroy. No identification system can be made absolutely foolproof and it is up to the individual to be vigilant with their information. I've been guarding my personal information religiously for years, because it's impossible for me to predict how that data might be used. I don't even give clerks things like my phone number or zip code when they ask me at a store. Mind you I use my credit cards a lot for the convenience, so I know the store is getting information about me anyway.
The SS# was never meant to be a general identifier, only to operate as the link to federal government benefits. Other sevrices use the number and have turned it into something more ubiquitous. It's a number that's issued and it has no relevance to an individual other than that. As such, local and state governments can't really rely on it and that's why they use other sources (bills, birth certificates, etc.) to have you verify who you are. As long as this situation continues, it will be easy for cretins to take your identity.
Slashdot Mirror
Like the proverbial irresistable force meeting the immoveable object.
Blizzard make spyware-thats-not-really-spyware, just to make sure no one's cheating (or perchance playing some other game).
Along comes Sony, trying desparately to keep people from listening to free music whilst ensuring that they can't listen to the music they paid for when they want and how they want.
And so these titans collide, as one's software can be used to bollix up the other's. Will there be lawsuits? Of course! And in the end, both companies will merge, combine their forces, and attack Google. This is so reminiscent of 1930s Germany. Please, let us annex the Sudetenland... we won't cause any trouble...
I don't see any difference between what Google are doing here and what they do to index web sites.
There is a big difference, in that copyright law exists to protect the author from abuse and or outright plagarism of their material. As an author and publisher I can see the argument here. It is fact technically illegal for you to copy a book using a photocopier, unless the material is for your own private use and not meant for commercial distribution. College professors routinely violate these rules when they photocopy and distribute copies of works for use in their classes. And what exactly gives Google the right to do this? Just as I didn't appoint TransUnion or Experian to keep track of my credit history, I didn't cede any of my rights to Google to allow them to access any of my published work. They have taken it upon themselves to do this and must suffer the legal backlash. To make this service available will require rewriting the laws.
Then again, because I am a science fiction writer/fan, I know that the idea is to make all information accessible to everyone. Google is on the right track, and no matter the outcome of any legal wrangles, will be seen as a pioneer in providing a unified, global resource for information distribution. Wouldn't it be nice to sit down with a Internet-connected, digital book plaque and call up any work you choose to? The only thing that I see as an impediment to a system like that is the requirement to make money. If authors and publishers didn't need to make money, they wouldn't be putting up much of a fuss.
We won't be seeing Utopia anytime soon.
Biometrics will eventually be the solution; it will be very hard to fake retinas, fingerprints, even biomagnetic signatures. This is of course until cloning becomes commonplace.
The fact is, for everything Man can create, Man can destroy. No identification system can be made absolutely foolproof and it is up to the individual to be vigilant with their information. I've been guarding my personal information religiously for years, because it's impossible for me to predict how that data might be used. I don't even give clerks things like my phone number or zip code when they ask me at a store. Mind you I use my credit cards a lot for the convenience, so I know the store is getting information about me anyway.
The SS# was never meant to be a general identifier, only to operate as the link to federal government benefits. Other sevrices use the number and have turned it into something more ubiquitous. It's a number that's issued and it has no relevance to an individual other than that. As such, local and state governments can't really rely on it and that's why they use other sources (bills, birth certificates, etc.) to have you verify who you are. As long as this situation continues, it will be easy for cretins to take your identity.