Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
The Courts Government Businesses Google The Internet Microsoft News

Microsoft Attacks Google on Copyright 188

The Microsoft Corporation has prepared a blistering attack on rival Google, arguing that the Web search leader takes a cavalier approach to copyright protection. The attack, such as it were, came from Microsoft's Associate General Counsel who was giving a speech to the Association of American Publishers...who have a copyright lawsuit against Google for the last sixteen months. So, an audience ready to hear about how Bad Google is.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Attacks Google on Copyright

Comments Filter:
  • by vivaoporto ( 1064484 ) on Tuesday March 06, 2007 @11:44AM (#18250044)
    Yesterday: Microsoft watches with disdain while $company break through unknown waters
    Today: Microsoft attacks $company initiative as being illegal, immoral and bad for business in general
    Tomorrow: Microsoft try to embrace the very same business model of $company, only with a layer of DRM on top of it, and try to leverage it using the profits of the OS and Office division.

    Nothing different from all other endeavors from our good old Microsoft. Who didn't have it coming?
  • Oh boy. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Uknowwhoibe ( 1066486 ) <uknowwhoibe@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 06, 2007 @11:45AM (#18250066)
    I am so excited that someone is finally taking MS on and not just competing with them, but afaik, coming up with a better product. I will be switching to Google's apps when they are live.
  • by bcrowell ( 177657 ) on Tuesday March 06, 2007 @11:59AM (#18250266) Homepage
    The really weird thing about the google lawsuits is that the publishers suing google are also google's business partners. It's basically a dispute between business allies that's being handled partly in the courts. There's speculation that the outcome will end up being harmful to fair use. Google has tons of cash, and can afford to pay the publishers a certain amount of money to end the suit, even if they really have a good fair use defense that might eventually have held up in court. If that happens, then everybody else's fair use rights could be diminished, because it will be seen as normal that you have to pay for what really should be fair use. Google could end up with a de facto monopoly on indexing books, because competitors wouldn't have enough money to pay the publishers what google paid. (This is mostly paraphrased from a long article in the New Yorker, IIRC.)
  • Re:As an author (Score:3, Interesting)

    by novus ordo ( 843883 ) on Tuesday March 06, 2007 @12:15PM (#18250480) Journal
    Just out of curiosity, have any of those that downloaded the torrent bought either of your books? If somebody found some value in your work they would surely encourage($$) you to produce more. Especially if you're small-time when it's much harder. Maybe the bagel man [uchicago.edu] analogy doesn't work on the Internet?
  • by jeevesbond ( 1066726 ) on Tuesday March 06, 2007 @12:18PM (#18250534) Homepage


    1. Microsoft attempt to compete with GNU/Linux via conventional methods: reducing cost (releasing free [microsoft.com]--as in beer--versions of products), advertising that TCO is higher for Linux than Windows [microsoft.com] (it's a lie, but what else should we expect them to say?)
    2. Conventional methods fail so Microsoft falls-back to good old fashioned dirty tricks: making spurious allegations [slashdot.org] about 'intellectual property'.
    3. ...
    4. Profit!


    1. Microsoft attempts to compete with Google via conventional methods: producing a competing [live.com] services [microsoft.com] with similar capabilities. Then advertise the services as usual, and throw in a bit of IE7 integration in the name of 'choice'.
    2. Conventional methods fail so Microsoft falls-back to good old fashioned dirty tricks: making spurious allegations [nytimes.com] about 'intellectual property'.
    3. Throw chair across room
    4. ...
    5. Profit!

    Personally am getting a feeling of: 'same bilge, different day' from Microsoft.

  • MSN search cache? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mph ( 7675 ) <mph@freebsd.org> on Tuesday March 06, 2007 @12:29PM (#18250680)

    "Google takes the position that everything may be freely copied unless the copyright owner notifies Google and tells it to stop," Mr. Rubin said. Microsoft, he said, asks the copyright's owner for permission first.
    I just checked search.msn.com [msn.com] and it has a cached copy of my webpages. I don't remember Microsoft asking me for permission. (Not that I mind, but it's at odds with Rubin's statement.)
  • Re:As an author (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tomstdenis ( 446163 ) <tomstdenis.gmail@com> on Tuesday March 06, 2007 @12:42PM (#18250834) Homepage
    Most people who would pirate my books are college bound students getting into cryptography (and mathematics). They're the people the books are aimed at since they're not very advanced texts (more pratical than theoretical).

    I don't know if people who torrented the books later bought copies. For me, I wasn't really that motivated by getting rich (or making more than a couple grand). I was more into getting the ideas out there. The first book, is actually available [legally] for free from the LibTomMath archive. Though the copy there is older than the printed copy. That being said, it would be validating that if all the people who read my books actually bought a copy I could then measure and say "cool, people read my book." Not that I expected to make a lot of sales. To be honest I thought both books would sell ~3K a piece then die out. As it stands right now I'm nowhere near that mark and it's been nearly a year for my first book and one quarter for the second.

    I think a combination of piracy and first time unknown authorism have contributed to the shitastic sales (more the latter than the former).

    To bring this back on point though, I don't think "leaking" a passage here or there would have a measurable impact on sales [see this [google.com] for an idea]. I probably did lose a few hundred sales to torrents though, keeping in mind I only sold 46 math texts last quarter...

    Anyways, parting words, write to be read, not to make sales. You'll be more satisfied in the end.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 06, 2007 @12:44PM (#18250860)
    "I say not this, for that I think the action such as it were disadvantage to be
    thought the projector of it ; but I say, and say truly, that my lord admiral ..."
    -Francis Bacon, 1859

    "I had heard such, as it were, sing before Jordan was half forded. I had seen
    faces where, pallid as they were, I beheld more celestial triumph than I had ..."
    -William Fishbough, 1874

    "... the covetous cruelty of the common sort, by their eager biting at gold, being
    such as it were enough to eclipse the brightness of a Prince's bounty."
    -Sir Nicholas Harris Nicolas, 1847

    The quotes come from the first several listings in Google Books from a search of "Such as it were" in quotes [google.com]. Perhaps you should read something in English and not in Olde English? The only works Google finds with the phrase "such as it were" are two hundred years old. Anyone using the phrase "such as it were" is being pretentious, trying to impress someone with their superior intellect and failing miserably.

    "Gay" not only no longer means "happy and carefree" it doesn't even mean "homosexual" any more. In the 1930s "straight" meant "honest", in the 1970s "straight" meant "not stoned" (sober), now it means heterosexual. Language changes. But "such as it were" was bad English two hundred years ago, despite the fact that Francis Bacon used the phrase (prolly like we use "well DUH" or "prolly" or "PuhLEEEESE" and God but I hate that last one...)

    "It" is a singular noun. "Were" is a plural verb. They don't go together, such as it was (or such as they were).

    That said, I'll cut Hemos some slack. My oldest daughter is mentally challenged, too, but I love her just the same.
  • by P0ldy ( 848358 ) on Tuesday March 06, 2007 @01:17PM (#18251410)
    Perhaps this comment is superfluous since the only person backing you up is an Anonymous Coward, and maybe that's you attempting to vindicate yourself. However, no reply attacking your intelligence, right though they were, gave the reason why the phrase is correct. "Such as it were" is an example of the subjunctive. It's a mood. Pick up a grammar book if you want further explanation. The selfsame mood is the reason for the phrase "Were I to go out...". What?? Were I? You don't say I were. You say I was! Yes, it's the subjunctive, and it's a part of so many languages and would still be important even if it were as little used as it is in English.
  • Re:English? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by adavies42 ( 746183 ) on Tuesday March 06, 2007 @03:21PM (#18253464)
    There's nothing wrong with initial "and" [upenn.edu]. (I.e., YHBT, YHL, HAND.)

If you suspect a man, don't employ him.