Forum for Strategic Concepts of Go
google books = copy right infringement? [#2252]
as much as i dislike google books, the claim that it is a somewhat broken window through which copyrights are infringed is strong. i.e. i don't even see the books from the country where i live.
It doesn't matter that I do not fully understand the meaning of the wording "it is a somewhat broken window through which copyrights are infringed...", as it is true that Google books infringes copyrights on worldwide, previously unknown scale.
Once, since "copyrights are infringed...",
Senseis does and should not collaborate or support such methods and/or media.
This is a valid appeal even if I might have sinned too in the past by deep-linking to Google books. (I am not sure, but could have done it)
About google books, please read ![[ext]](images/extlink.gif)
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22281
Please notice that the link to google doesn't even give full or partly access to the book but just a search interface - you can look for quotes but you can't read it in any meaningful way and no diagrams are shown. So, yes it is a strong claim that this case represents a copyright infringement by google.
Cheers Tapir
Or to quote Google:
"Why can't I read the entire book? Print
Many of the books in Google Books come from authors and publishers who participate in our Partner Program. For these books, our partners decide how much of the book is browsable -- anywhere from a few sample pages to the whole book.
For books that enter Google Books through the Library Project, what you see depends on the book's copyright status. We respect copyright law and the tremendous creative effort authors put into their work. If the book is in the public domain and therefore out of copyright, you can page through the entire book and even download it and read it offline. But if the book is under copyright, and the publisher or author is not part of the Partner Program, we only show basic information about the book, similar to a card catalog, and, in some cases, a few snippets -- sentences of your search terms in context. The aim of Google Books is to help you discover books and assist you with buying them or finding a copy at a local library. It's like going to a bookstore and browsing - with a Google twist."
Google books does not infringe. Further, it provides useful links to used booksellers that carry out-of-print books. I just purchased SCoG from one of these for about $20. Deleting the link to GB isn't doing anyone any favours, including the copyright holders.
I agree 'google books != copyright infringement', so I've put your link back. Sometimes I'm wrong.
I'm trying to stop the slippery slope of: 'Where do we stop on the continuum of pointers to unauthorized copies of copyrighted Go books?'. We could create Byzantine rules based on distinctions between an URL for a torrent, a google search URL that only finds a torrent, a 'Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, look in these places and you will find something interesting'. I'm lumping these all together as amounting to the same thing in the end. The layers of abstract indirection don't change the intent.
The broken windows concept is much the same intention as nipping something in the bud, or a stitch in time saves nine. By clearing up dropped sweety wrappers, I am making a stand before a confusion can be engendered that SL might allow some copyright vagueness. I'm taking a firm line that SL is not for sharing links to unauthorized copies of copyrighted books.
To avoid being dragged into a mire of fine distinctions, I've taken quite a blunt approach. I reap what I sow by being heavy handed. I haven't acted perfectly, and so to an extent I've put petrol on the fire rather than damping it down. I regret that. I'm not perfect. Its tough to try to stop this and not offend anyone.
![[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]](images/stone-hello.png "Sensei's Library")