Daniel, you'd do well to read the copyright laws of a few nations or, even better, the Berne Convention, signed by 164 countries, including the U.S. An author's right to determine if and how his work is published is virtually absolute. No distinction in laws exists over whether a book is in-print or not, easily available or virtually impossible to obtain. If you don't understand that, you don't understand copyright law.
There's no misunderstanding between Europe and Google. Europe understands copyright law and what Google intends to do quite well. In contrast, Google's leadership either doesn't understand copyright law or it finds it convenient to pretend that the law is something other than what it is.
The German government's recently filed objection illustrates that when it notes: "The opt out mechanism [of the settlement] stands on its head the most fundamental and essential underlying principal of international copyright law and the laws of Germany -- exclusivity. Under both U.S. and German copyright law, no one may use an author's intellectual property without permission."
A close analogy can be drawn between the sanctity of an author's work and the sanctity of his home. As William Pit once eloquently observed of English law:
"“The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the Crown. It may be frail—its roof may shake—the wind may blow through it—the storm may enter—the rain may enter—but the King of England cannot enter: all his forces dare not cross the threshold of that ruined tenement.”
In a similar fashion, the poorest writer in the most impoverished of country may bid defiance to Google and all its grand schemes. Google may not display his written labors without his express written permission. That's the law in 164 countries, including the United States.
I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Michael, it is very unlikely that Berne even applies to the Settlement, considering that it is not a State-imposed limitation or formality. See Ricketson/Ginsburg "International Copyright and Neighbouring Rights" (OUP 2006) for extensive comments on Berne's various aspects.
Having said that, you are right in claiming that it is a violation of copyright. There would not have been a settlement if it were not. The issue, of course, is how they intend to proceed in Europe.
copyrights were never given by a law or a government but were given by the creator or through evolution as the reader chooses to believe. Eat this fruit and have ultimate knowledge is the first immoral temptation near the beginning of one ancient legend.
Click this link and access all the knowledge of humanity's libraries is the immoral temptation of copyright laws today.
You are welcome to comment here, but your remarks should be relevant to the conversation. To keep the exchanges focused and engaging, we reserve the right to remove off-topic comments, or self-promoting URLs and vacuous messages
Daniel, you'd do well to read the copyright laws of a few nations or, even better, the Berne Convention, signed by 164 countries, including the U.S. An author's right to determine if and how his work is published is virtually absolute. No distinction in laws exists over whether a book is in-print or not, easily available or virtually impossible to obtain. If you don't understand that, you don't understand copyright law.
ReplyDeleteThere's no misunderstanding between Europe and Google. Europe understands copyright law and what Google intends to do quite well. In contrast, Google's leadership either doesn't understand copyright law or it finds it convenient to pretend that the law is something other than what it is.
The German government's recently filed objection illustrates that when it notes: "The opt out mechanism [of the settlement] stands on its head the most fundamental and essential underlying principal of international copyright law and the laws of Germany -- exclusivity. Under both U.S. and German copyright law, no one may use an author's intellectual property without permission."
http://thepublicindex.org/docs/letters/germany.pdf
A close analogy can be drawn between the sanctity of an author's work and the sanctity of his home. As William Pit once eloquently observed of English law:
"“The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the Crown. It may be frail—its roof may shake—the wind may blow through it—the storm may enter—the rain may enter—but the King of England cannot enter: all his forces dare not cross the threshold of that ruined tenement.”
In a similar fashion, the poorest writer in the most impoverished of country may bid defiance to Google and all its grand schemes. Google may not display his written labors without his express written permission. That's the law in 164 countries, including the United States.
--Michael W. Perry, Seattle
I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
ReplyDeletePatricia
http://dataentryjob-s.com
Michael, it is very unlikely that Berne even applies to the Settlement, considering that it is not a State-imposed limitation or formality. See Ricketson/Ginsburg "International Copyright and Neighbouring Rights" (OUP 2006) for extensive comments on Berne's various aspects.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, you are right in claiming that it is a violation of copyright. There would not have been a settlement if it were not. The issue, of course, is how they intend to proceed in Europe.
A. Savin, Copenahagen
It's nice blog content full idea and informative Greeting for you all
ReplyDeletetoday I nothing long comment only one
GREETING AND SUCESS FOR UR LIFE SO FAR
It is a good posting. I liked it. It's very impressive.
ReplyDeleteBathmate
copyrights were never given by a law or a government but were given by the creator or through evolution as the reader chooses to believe.
ReplyDeleteEat this fruit and have ultimate knowledge is the first immoral temptation near the beginning of one ancient legend.
Click this link and access all the knowledge of humanity's libraries is the immoral temptation of copyright laws today.