• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: HGRAB. Syndication. Google. Grey area.
• From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
• Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 22:46:55 -0800
• References: <02e301c19889$99cf3680$2cd0a340@paultx>

Paul T wrote:
> Either both HGRAB and Google should be sued,
> because they both sell the content
> *which does not belong to them*, or both
> HGRAB and Google should be considered
> 'just a service'.

I would guess the following:

1) I think you can make reasonable arguments that providing a search
facility (essentially an electronic index): (a) constitutes an original
work and therefore does not violate copyrights, and (b) is a derived
work and therefore does violate copyrights. I'd bet on (a), but really
don't know. Any lawyers out there?

2) Caching a copy locally (as Google does) probably does constitute
copyright infringement -- witness the standard copyrights in books that
prohibit electronic copying. My guess is that this hasn't been
prosecuted because (a) it is useful and (b) Internet law is still in its
infancy.

-- Ron

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: HGRAB. Syndication. Google. Grey area.
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
  • RE: HGRAB. Syndication. Google. Grey area.
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>

• References:
  • HGRAB. Syndication. Google. Grey area.
    • From: Paul T <pault12@p...>

• Prev by Date: RE: [ANN] XML Limerick Competition
• Next by Date: Re: JAXP's ID Transform failing to include namespacedeclaration attributes
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: web crawling (was: Re: HGRAB. Syndication. Google. Grey area.)
• Next by thread: RE: HGRAB. Syndication. Google. Grey area.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread