Google defeats authors in U.S. book-scanning lawsuit

[Troy]

This was the decision that Reuters reported on last November.

 

"Google made unauthorized digital editions of nearly all of the world's valuable copyright-protected literature and profits from displaying those works," Aiken said. "Such mass digitization and exploitation far exceeds the bounds of the fair use defense." --Paul Aiken

 

Those with the biggest and baddest computers make all the money.  The content provider gets nothing. 

 

It seems to me that Google would be willing to share some of the money they make with the people who created the stuff they are selling.

 

Google would have no "value" to provide otherwise.

[Cynique]

Google is a vast faceless entity.  Who is Google's CEO?  Where is its home office?  Should I google Google??? Or will that enable it to profit off itself??  If I look up Google on Wikipedia will they give an accurate answer and will they include this lawsuit brought against Google in their data??  What happens if I google Wikipedia? I'm conflicted.

 

I am also reminded of the Jeopardy contestant who was finally defeated yestereday after winning for 12 straight days earning over 300,000 dollars.  He was criticized for the tactics he used in playing the game.  BTW,  this Asian guy was extremely  knowledgeable, which of course gave him a great advantage. He'd never stick to one category but would jump all over the board in search of the Daily Doubles he could use to increase the lead he usually had.  And when hitting a Daily Double square, if he didn't know anything about the subject, he'd just bet a small amount, satisfied that he had blocked other contestants from having an opportunity to increase their total, while not losing very much. himself.  Do we fault this guy for running rough shod over others?  Is the name of the game to win at any cost? Or should opponents be given a fighting chance? Should  a capitalistic nation of rabid sports fans be expected to ignore the mantra that embodies their spirit of competition: "winning isn't everything; it's the only thing!", a motto which the other side of the "greed is good" coin.

 

  And have the ethics and morality of the average person been over estimated?  Considering that everyone's goal is to get ahead and lead a life of affluence,  are we, as individuals, just microcosms of ruthless successful monopolies,  manuevering and manipulating to achieve our American dream of being in control and having it all??   

 

Who knows?  Corporate America, however, is more socialistic than it realiizes because the only difference between it and Socialism is that instead of the Government running everything, business conglomerates are laying the ground work to do this. 

 

Whatever. I have better things to be interested in.   I'm so glad Neil DeGrasse Tyson, the black astrophysicist is emceeing the latest version of Cosmos, now appearing on network TV.  He's my own private Pope because he is a supreme spokesman for free thinkers, awed by the wonders of the universe.  And listening to Tyson expound on the paradox of quantum physics is much more compelling than watching Obama trying to explain why young people should enroll in the afforable care insurance program (and frustrate the large companies).      

[Troy]

That first paragraph was cute.  Wikipedia is effectively Google or rather Wikipedia is Google's biotch. 

 

You probably would have enjoyed this film: PARTICLE FEVER.  I saw it in the theater on Friday.  It was more heavily weighted on the Human interest aspect of the experimentalists and theorists.  I was hoping it would explain more of the science.  In the end it was pretty interesting.
 

 

One thing I did notice My wife and I were the only Black people in the theater and there were no Black folks in the film