Comments on: Japanese Copyright Law http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Sun, 27 May 2012 01:17:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Timon http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/comment-page-1/#comment-48797 Timon Thu, 06 Sep 2007 09:42:44 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/#comment-48797 <p>Actually, there is a very good case that Google's original indexing was an infringement of copyright. It is hard to see how duplicating copyrighted material and creating a derivative commercial product is not at least potentially an infringing use, and in the early days Stanford's internet administrator often had to take calls about the proto-googlebot downloading huge amounts of copyrighted material. Google was absolutely a pirate company in other so-called "intellectual property" areas as well. Their entire business model was ripped off a patented technique from rival Overture. I think they eventually paid some extortion money but the point is they didn't ask and didn't care, just like with their pirate print and news services.<br><br>And on the release day of the iPod, does anyone doubt that "rip, mix, burn" would have constituted an "inducement" to infringement under the Grokster standard?<br><br>The point is that by the time lawyers are even aware of your issue it is too late. Google and Apple got away with it because no one understood what they were up to and by the time they did it was too late to refuse to deal with them, as news and music companies would like to be able to.</p> Actually, there is a very good case that Google’s original indexing was an infringement of copyright. It is hard to see how duplicating copyrighted material and creating a derivative commercial product is not at least potentially an infringing use, and in the early days Stanford’s internet administrator often had to take calls about the proto-googlebot downloading huge amounts of copyrighted material. Google was absolutely a pirate company in other so-called “intellectual property” areas as well. Their entire business model was ripped off a patented technique from rival Overture. I think they eventually paid some extortion money but the point is they didn’t ask and didn’t care, just like with their pirate print and news services.

And on the release day of the iPod, does anyone doubt that “rip, mix, burn” would have constituted an “inducement” to infringement under the Grokster standard?

The point is that by the time lawyers are even aware of your issue it is too late. Google and Apple got away with it because no one understood what they were up to and by the time they did it was too late to refuse to deal with them, as news and music companies would like to be able to.

]]> By: Timon http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/comment-page-1/#comment-39307 Timon Thu, 06 Sep 2007 08:42:44 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/#comment-39307 <p>Actually, there is a very good case that Google's original indexing was an infringement of copyright. It is hard to see how duplicating copyrighted material and creating a derivative commercial product is not at least potentially an infringing use, and in the early days Stanford's internet administrator often had to take calls about the proto-googlebot downloading huge amounts of copyrighted material. Google was absolutely a pirate company in other so-called "intellectual property" areas as well. Their entire business model was ripped off a patented technique from rival Overture. I think they eventually paid some extortion money but the point is they didn't ask and didn't care, just like with their pirate print and news services.</p> <p>And on the release day of the iPod, does anyone doubt that "rip, mix, burn" would have constituted an "inducement" to infringement under the Grokster standard?</p> <p>The point is that by the time lawyers are even aware of your issue it is too late. Google and Apple got away with it because no one understood what they were up to and by the time they did it was too late to refuse to deal with them, as news and music companies would like to be able to.</p> Actually, there is a very good case that Google’s original indexing was an infringement of copyright. It is hard to see how duplicating copyrighted material and creating a derivative commercial product is not at least potentially an infringing use, and in the early days Stanford’s internet administrator often had to take calls about the proto-googlebot downloading huge amounts of copyrighted material. Google was absolutely a pirate company in other so-called “intellectual property” areas as well. Their entire business model was ripped off a patented technique from rival Overture. I think they eventually paid some extortion money but the point is they didn’t ask and didn’t care, just like with their pirate print and news services.

And on the release day of the iPod, does anyone doubt that “rip, mix, burn” would have constituted an “inducement” to infringement under the Grokster standard?

The point is that by the time lawyers are even aware of your issue it is too late. Google and Apple got away with it because no one understood what they were up to and by the time they did it was too late to refuse to deal with them, as news and music companies would like to be able to.

]]> By: Mike Linksvayer http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/comment-page-1/#comment-48796 Mike Linksvayer Thu, 06 Sep 2007 07:37:29 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/#comment-48796 <p>Wow, I'm impressed by the stupidity of that law, but it seems to be true<br><a href="http://www.webmasterworld.com/asia_pacific_search_engines/3212858.htm">http://www.webmasterworld.com/asia_pacific_sear...</a><br><br>(I'm completely unsurprised by the swing from state prohibition to promotion.)<br><br>So if such laws existed in the US, search would have developed elsewhere, subject to US influence.<br><br>If such laws existed wordlwide, web search would be another illegal (and not very good relative to Google) P2P application.</p> Wow, I’m impressed by the stupidity of that law, but it seems to be true
http://www.webmasterworld.com/asia_pacific_sear…

(I’m completely unsurprised by the swing from state prohibition to promotion.)

So if such laws existed in the US, search would have developed elsewhere, subject to US influence.

If such laws existed wordlwide, web search would be another illegal (and not very good relative to Google) P2P application.

]]> By: Mike Linksvayer http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/comment-page-1/#comment-39306 Mike Linksvayer Thu, 06 Sep 2007 06:37:29 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/#comment-39306 <p>Wow, I'm impressed by the stupidity of that law, but it seems to be true http://www.webmasterworld.com/asia_pacific_search_engines/3212858.htm</p> <p>(I'm completely unsurprised by the swing from state prohibition to promotion.)</p> <p>So if such laws existed in the US, search would have developed elsewhere, subject to US influence.</p> <p>If such laws existed wordlwide, web search would be another illegal (and not very good relative to Google) P2P application.</p> Wow, I’m impressed by the stupidity of that law, but it seems to be true http://www.webmasterworld.com/asia_pacific_search_engines/3212858.htm

(I’m completely unsurprised by the swing from state prohibition to promotion.)

So if such laws existed in the US, search would have developed elsewhere, subject to US influence.

If such laws existed wordlwide, web search would be another illegal (and not very good relative to Google) P2P application.

]]> By: John Jackson http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/comment-page-1/#comment-48795 John Jackson Thu, 06 Sep 2007 04:57:33 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/#comment-48795 <p>If this is true about Japanese law, how do their computers work without violating the law? Don't they have a copy of the copyrighted works in RAM or in a disk cache? Or do they scramble them so they aren't an exact duplicate?</p> If this is true about Japanese law, how do their computers work without violating the law? Don’t they have a copy of the copyrighted works in RAM or in a disk cache? Or do they scramble them so they aren’t an exact duplicate?

]]> By: John Jackson http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/comment-page-1/#comment-39305 John Jackson Thu, 06 Sep 2007 03:57:33 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/09/05/japanese-copyright-law/#comment-39305 <p>If this is true about Japanese law, how do their computers work without violating the law? Don't they have a copy of the copyrighted works in RAM or in a disk cache? Or do they scramble them so they aren't an exact duplicate?</p> If this is true about Japanese law, how do their computers work without violating the law? Don’t they have a copy of the copyrighted works in RAM or in a disk cache? Or do they scramble them so they aren’t an exact duplicate?

]]>