BigDave - 4:58 am on May 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Google has stepped way out of bounds on this one, and will soon learn the joys of legal actions caused by corporate arrogance, like their big brother MS has for years.

Really? You have seen their end product and know this for a fact?

I have been reading for years about how this feature or that feature is copyright infringement. But I haven't seen any suits from serious litigants.

I'm not saying that they are not stepping over the line. What I am saying is that I absolutely convinced that you have no way of knowing this.

I would suggest to these bright boys that they download the pdf of the dmca and take a very close read of it, that document is what killed what was left of the dream google is trying to revive here in terms of trying to 'organize the world's information'.

I suspect that they know it very well. It is the piece of legislation that actually gives them many of the rights that they have.

And don't just read the DMCA, read all of title 17. It all applies. Pay special attention to anyplace that mentions archive or library.

And keep this one in mind too, I can't remember the exact thing google did last year, but it involved delivering single pages of some type of content, there was supposed to be a restriction on it, 1 page or something, it took a guy a day or two to crack that restriction, and he was able to download the full work. This failure on google's part is exactly what the publishing industry has every right to not only fear, but to expect.

Not only did you not remember the right incedent, you didn't remember the right company. Try Amazon.

Anyway, what *might* happen is not the same as it will happen.

Something may have been written in 1640, but if it was printed in 1991, that physical book is subject to copyright, and can't be digitally reproduced as is.

Absolutely incorrect in the United States. There is NOT typographic copyright in the US.