[IP] more on Google to Offer News Archive
Begin forwarded message:
From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: September 7, 2006 8:31:53 AM PDT
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] re: Google to Offer News Archive
Reply-To: dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[Note: This comment comes from reader Sally Richards. DLH]
From: "sally" <sally@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: September 6, 2006 11:27:01 PM PDT
To: dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Dewayne-Net] Google to Offer News Archive
I hope Google and its partners in this venture remember the terms they
purchased the stories under. Many freelance pieces "published years
ago," did
not include Internet rights under standard contracts. any of those
stories
were pre-commercial Internet. And many of those contracts have long
since
disappeared with time.
Many of those contracts included First North American Rights. I have
to remind
publishers many times over that they did not purchase all-inclusive
rights
when I do vanity searches and find my articles on the Internet that were
purchased under First North American Rights. My guess is that a lot of
freelancers will have to go into the business of being their own
police and
lawyer when this new business model for Google comes about.
You know, whenever Kinko's makes a print of a photograph, they ask
you to sign
a release notifying you of copyright laws and stating that you
personally own
the rights to the photographs they are reproducing. Perhaps it's time
to start
holding Google responsible for its content.... And to put a Can-spam law
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/canspam.htm into place where
there's a flat $11,000 fee in place when a company is found in
violation of
the law (although, I'd like to see how many times that law has been
implemented).
Even if Google agrees to take the content off the site, you have
sites like
the Wayback Machine http://www.archive.org/index.php that will keep that
content up forever. In the end, it's usually the people who create
the content
who make the least, and the companies that don't give a damn about
rights (or
say, "Who cares, sue me,") that end up profiting the most.
The only way that's going to end is if there is some kind of law
protecting
content creators from companies that violate rights contracts. Writers
currently have to prove damages, and with no way to audit microsales,
how many
times something has been accessed, for how much $$ and if it is
originally
what brought a surfer to the site (if so, what other purchases were
made on
that visit), damages cannot be physically proven.
Sal
Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/