copyright law (1 Viewer)

[Dick7Access]

German lawmakers condemn Google campaign against copyright law.

I have mixed emotions, probable because I don't know enough about it.
What do you think?

 

[Vassago]

Google isn't against copyright law. Google is against the copyright laws that have been attempted that I also believe go beyond the scope of the government and restrict fair use. Recent attempts at passing copyright reform laws would have made it criminal offenses to even post yourself singing a karaoke song or post your 3 year old daughter dancing to the song on youtube. I believe that goes beyond the scope the government should be allowed to be involved, short of ensuring fair use is allowed. Obviously, money would not be made by the people posting these videos.

Recently, copyright holders have been going above and beyond ridiculous, especially with government involvement. Between suing 80 year old grandmas using subpoenas potentionally recieved illegally, even when it's proven they don't even owna computer, to pushing the New Zealand government to arrest Kim DotCom and confiscate MegaUpload.com, even though many business used it for legitimate purposes and without proper cause. The judge has already thrown out evidence related to the warrant as the search warrant has been deemed not appropriate. They don't even care! The sole purpose of going after him was to shut down the site.

 

[Steve R.]

Is this the news story that is the subject of the post?
German lawmakers condemn Google campaign against copyright law

Madeline Chambers wrote:

Internet lobbyists say they are worried the German law will set a precedent for other countries such as France and Italy that have shown an interest in having Google pay publishers for the right to show their news snippets in its search results.

Copyright existed before there ever was an internet. Technology, through the internet, now allows us to "share" information rather effortlessly. The copyright privilege needs to adapt to the internet.

The intent of the copyright privilege is to encourage the creation of content for the benefit of society. As such it allows the creator of content to have a temporary limited monopolistic privilege over their content before it enters the public domain. Headlines/news snippets should not qualify as "content" subject to "protection" under the copyright privilege. See "fair use".

In this case, the links provide a method to allow people to locate content posted on the internet. When a content creator posts content on the internet, there is explicit acknowledgement that it was put there to be viewed. If you don't want your content viewed, don't make it available.

The problem is that the content creators are inventing out-of-thin-air more "rights" for themselves to extort revenue. In this case the trading (sharing) of headlines/news snippet. The sharing of headlines/news snippets should qualify as "fair use" since the poster is essentially telling the viewer where they can find the content. As an absurd analogy, should you have to pay someone to find a book that you wish to purchase? It would seem that it is the German government that is distorting the intent of the copyright privilege.