In particular, pay attention to the section on Google Books. Google started out intending to copy every book they could get their hands on and make it available on the Internet without the author's permission. When there was a sufficient outcry against that, they tried to get a law passed that would allow it - except that the author could opt out.
And yet major and respected universities like Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Princeton, Oxford are choosing to partner with Google to continue the project. Being accused of violating IP rights does not make it factual.
How's your French? I've been a couple of times and have been determined to use the local vernacular! (Only however, where neither life nor limb were at risk!)
I can get by, dealing with storekeepers and waiters. But since Paris is the most visited city in the world, many Parisians speak more English than I speak French. My wife is more fluent than me, but I work on changing that from time to time.
They were very nice to us in Paris. It's still key to 'greet' or at least acknowledge people in businesses after you enter, in French. That little bit of politeness goes a long way.
We also spent four days in London. That's where the rude people of Europe seem to live. At least three times, someone walked right into me or mostly, my wife, on the street and walked away without a word. And yes, we retained our wallets. A friend who lives in London agrees with our rudeness assessment.
They were nice to us in Paris and in other cities we visited in France, and Italy as well, during the month we were there.
We should rally against mob mentality. Who's with me!
I keep most trolls on the ignore list, but this reply to one of my ignored actually made me happy that people sometimes reply to and quote them. That way I can have a good laugh while avoiding most of the BS from trolls.
And yet major and respected universities like Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Princeton, Oxford are choosing to partner with Google to continue the project. Being accused of violating IP rights does not make it factual.
I don't know, I haven't read it or accepted it, I never use Google sites while logged in (to my Gmail account) and actively block any attempt to track my online activities.
The new policy has attracted attention from various governments around the world, yet you are quite dismissive of any negatives regarding it.
So you have no idea and are basing your opinion on hearsay?
shocked I say.
quite frankly I am enough of an anonymous web browsing person to not really care and what little I've read about the policy (almost all site's policies) and heard about it outside of the "End is Nigh" type of histrionics it seems to be more of the same, in one package as opposed to 30.
I'm sure we'll find out more about it in the coming days/weeks/months and when all the facts are on the table I'll formulate a concrete opinion.
Until then I'll keep doing what I'm doing without the tinfoil hat and without the judgmental attitude towards a company that is probably hated by a lot of people on this site simply because they DARE compete with Apple in some fields...
And yet major and respected universities like Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Princeton, Oxford are choosing to partner with Google to continue the project. Being accused of violating IP rights does not make it factual.
And yet major and respected universities like Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Princeton, Oxford are choosing to partner with Google to continue the project. Being accused of violating IP rights does not make it factual.
Google tried to do it without partnering with anyone, meaning without author or publisher permission. This was shown to be blatantly illegal, so Google had to change tactics, and actually partner legally.
If you start to violate IP rights, but are prevented from continuing to violate those rights, that does not absolve you from the original theft attempt.
(when defending Google against lying and theft, you might reference something other than Google's own website).
The really amazing thing to me was that Google was #2. I guess people don't mind someone stealing all their private information and selling it to the highest bidder. Or stealing intellectual property left and right.
Think of it this way, most people don't say they'll do an internet search for something, they say they'll 'Google' something. When your brand name becomes a verb, odds are you'll be somewhat admired.
Think of it this way, most people don't say they'll do an internet search for something, they say they'll 'Google' something. When your brand name becomes a verb, odds are you'll be somewhat admired.
Just like iPhone users don't say "My phone is ringing" or "My phone is messing up" when referring to an iPhone...they always use the product's name...
While Apple has been accused of violating intellectual property rights (and has even lost a case or two and had to pay up), they do not base their entire business model on using property that doesn't belong to them.
Great, more hyperbole filled BS statements of opinion as fact. So Google bases their "entire business model" on stealing IP? Really? Because Google never did anything innovative, like revolutionize internet searching, online maps, online email, etc.
Google tried to do it without partnering with anyone, meaning without author or publisher permission. This was shown to be blatantly illegal, so Google had to change tactics, and actually partner legally.
If you start to violate IP rights, but are prevented from continuing to violate those rights, that does not absolve you from the original theft attempt.
(when defending Google against lying and theft, you might reference something other than Google's own website).
So your big issue was no one was helping them catalog the books? Other than that what changed?
Comments
Start here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Google
In particular, pay attention to the section on Google Books. Google started out intending to copy every book they could get their hands on and make it available on the Internet without the author's permission. When there was a sufficient outcry against that, they tried to get a law passed that would allow it - except that the author could opt out.
And yet major and respected universities like Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Princeton, Oxford are choosing to partner with Google to continue the project. Being accused of violating IP rights does not make it factual.
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/partners.html
How's your French? I've been a couple of times and have been determined to use the local vernacular! (Only however, where neither life nor limb were at risk!)
I can get by, dealing with storekeepers and waiters. But since Paris is the most visited city in the world, many Parisians speak more English than I speak French. My wife is more fluent than me, but I work on changing that from time to time.
They were very nice to us in Paris. It's still key to 'greet' or at least acknowledge people in businesses after you enter, in French. That little bit of politeness goes a long way.
We also spent four days in London. That's where the rude people of Europe seem to live. At least three times, someone walked right into me or mostly, my wife, on the street and walked away without a word. And yes, we retained our wallets. A friend who lives in London agrees with our rudeness assessment.
They were nice to us in Paris and in other cities we visited in France, and Italy as well, during the month we were there.
We should rally against mob mentality. Who's with me!
I keep most trolls on the ignore list, but this reply to one of my ignored actually made me happy that people sometimes reply to and quote them. That way I can have a good laugh while avoiding most of the BS from trolls.
And yet major and respected universities like Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Princeton, Oxford are choosing to partner with Google to continue the project. Being accused of violating IP rights does not make it factual.
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/partners.html
So before Google was going to take Nike's slogan to heart and just do it.
Now that they "partnered" (which I'm sure involves NO money changing hands) with these institutions it's all okay.
I don't know, I haven't read it or accepted it, I never use Google sites while logged in (to my Gmail account) and actively block any attempt to track my online activities.
The new policy has attracted attention from various governments around the world, yet you are quite dismissive of any negatives regarding it.
So you have no idea and are basing your opinion on hearsay?
shocked I say.
quite frankly I am enough of an anonymous web browsing person to not really care and what little I've read about the policy (almost all site's policies) and heard about it outside of the "End is Nigh" type of histrionics it seems to be more of the same, in one package as opposed to 30.
I'm sure we'll find out more about it in the coming days/weeks/months and when all the facts are on the table I'll formulate a concrete opinion.
Until then I'll keep doing what I'm doing without the tinfoil hat and without the judgmental attitude towards a company that is probably hated by a lot of people on this site simply because they DARE compete with Apple in some fields...
And yet major and respected universities like Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Princeton, Oxford are choosing to partner with Google to continue the project. Being accused of violating IP rights does not make it factual.
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/partners.html
If an institution agrees to partner with Google, there's nothing wrong with it.
My objection was to Google's earlier argument that the had the right to copy all the world's printed works and make it accessible WITHOUT PERMISSION.
Your claim doesn't change that.
And yet major and respected universities like Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Princeton, Oxford are choosing to partner with Google to continue the project. Being accused of violating IP rights does not make it factual.
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/partners.html
Google tried to do it without partnering with anyone, meaning without author or publisher permission. This was shown to be blatantly illegal, so Google had to change tactics, and actually partner legally.
If you start to violate IP rights, but are prevented from continuing to violate those rights, that does not absolve you from the original theft attempt.
(when defending Google against lying and theft, you might reference something other than Google's own website).
The really amazing thing to me was that Google was #2. I guess people don't mind someone stealing all their private information and selling it to the highest bidder. Or stealing intellectual property left and right.
Think of it this way, most people don't say they'll do an internet search for something, they say they'll 'Google' something. When your brand name becomes a verb, odds are you'll be somewhat admired.
In France, to make yourself understood -- you need to speak slower and louder...
...the ugly American...
Hah, my French was apparently so bad everyone immediately switched to english before I could I even finish a sentence.
I do think they appreciated the effort though.
Think of it this way, most people don't say they'll do an internet search for something, they say they'll 'Google' something. When your brand name becomes a verb, odds are you'll be somewhat admired.
Just like iPhone users don't say "My phone is ringing" or "My phone is messing up" when referring to an iPhone...they always use the product's name...
While Apple has been accused of violating intellectual property rights (and has even lost a case or two and had to pay up), they do not base their entire business model on using property that doesn't belong to them.
Great, more hyperbole filled BS statements of opinion as fact. So Google bases their "entire business model" on stealing IP? Really? Because Google never did anything innovative, like revolutionize internet searching, online maps, online email, etc.
Google tried to do it without partnering with anyone, meaning without author or publisher permission. This was shown to be blatantly illegal, so Google had to change tactics, and actually partner legally.
If you start to violate IP rights, but are prevented from continuing to violate those rights, that does not absolve you from the original theft attempt.
(when defending Google against lying and theft, you might reference something other than Google's own website).
So your big issue was no one was helping them catalog the books? Other than that what changed?