Google And Microsoft Sued For Linking, Indirectly, To Infringing Music
from the good-luck dept
Well, people have asked in the past how Google and Microsoft's search engines are really all that different from some of the file sharing search engines, and now we've finally got a lawsuit to at least explore some of that. It's not a major label, but a small indie blues label called Blues Destiny is suing Google and Microsoft along with RapidShare. At issue, of course, is that people are uploading Blues Destiny music to RapidShare, and searches via Google and Microsoft can find them. As Eric Goldman notes in the writeup linked above, the label isn't particularly clear in what it's upset about, so he believes the real issue isn't even that Google and Microsoft link people to RapidShare, but that it finds other sites that then link to RapidShare. That seems like many degrees removed from actually infringing -- and it's difficult to even see a clear claim for "inducing" infringement. Goldman also notes that the lawsuit is complicated by Blues Destiny's imprecision and vagueness in a series of (increasingly exasperated) takedown notices, which is coupled with Google not complying -- but potentially that is due to the failure of Blue Destiny to properly state what needed to be taken down. Either way, it's difficult to see how either Google or Microsoft is going to be found liable here, but the lawsuit is still worth watching, given the questions about where the fine line is drawn between just being a search engine and being a contributory infringer.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: contributory infringement, copyright, inducement, linking, search engines
Companies: blues destiny, google, microsoft, rapidshare
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
So it probably won't turn out like Blues Destiny thinks it will.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A blessing in disguise!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A blessing in disguise!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: A blessing in disguise!
I agree, but it would be nice to have a ruling either way.
Preferably what vyvyan said "that linking is not infringement" ... with that I will come back from the fantasy land I just found myself in ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A blessing in disguise!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
same as the newspaper woman
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"do this right now?"
"do what?"
"this thing i want you to do!"
"what thing?"
Z"don't you play stupid with me, you know what i'm talking about!"
"no, we really don't"
"fine, i'll sue you then."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For Christmas, I want
One of the ways plaintiffs' counsel extort companies is by filing immensely vague complaints with no obvious theory or facts. Until recently, the standard in federal court (and still the standard in most state courts) is that the complaint need only state facts consistent with an actionable theory - so the fact that the complaint says little is not a problem, so long as what it does say is consistent. While the defense struggles to figure out what the @#$%@% the complaint is supposed to mean, it still has to spend money defending itself. Meanwhile, the plaintiff is getting discovery, groping around for any evidence of any wrongdoing. Whether or not it finds any, it is still cheaper to settle than to go to trial and risk a crazy verdict.
The rule against this practice does not get enforced. Consequently, we see lawyers willing to file vague or even ludicrous lawsuits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rob banks instead
If this metaphor isn't applicable or comparable, someone tell me why.
Stupidity like this is what makes people want to screw these companies by any means possible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
linking to infringing content is not illegal
in other words sue users
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.bluesdestinyrecords.com/ipnmonitor/index.php?maincat_id=6
It links to Apple's page.
From many of Apple's pages there are links to others - including Google's..
http://www.apple.com/webapps/socialnetworking/
They are therefore: linking to these same spots.
Pot meet Kettle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe, just maybe
Then again, I suppose I should take the red pill and wake up to reality ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just might happen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]