kaled - 11:07 am on May 29, 2005 (gmt 0)

Dave, you obviously know your stuff with respect to US copyright law (but there is a world outside the US). What would be the legal position (in your opinion) in the following situation?

1) I've written a maths paper on how one might make local folds in space to facilitate short-range teleportation.
2) The paper is available for download at a cost of $100.00
3) Six months later, Google caches the paper without seeking consent.
4) Google makes copies available from its cache, free of charge. I discover this six months later.
5) Because people think I must be mad or a con-artist, no one has bought a copy, therefore Google has not, apparently, harmed me financially.
6) Google has only served one copy of the whole paper - to a student in China.
7) I live in the UK.

Has Google broken copyright law?
What penalty might be applied if it were proven?

On reading the paper, the student realises he should have paid for it but decides not to bother.

Has the Chinese student broken copyright law?
If yes, how might it be proven and what what penalty is likely to apply?

Though Google has only served one whole copy of the paper, it has served snippets with adverts thousands of times and received, in total, $1000.00 in revenue.

Has Google broken copyright law?
What penalty might be applied if it were proven?

I decide to sue Google, and it transpires in court that my ex-wife hacked my website allowing Googlebot access to the paper.

Has my ex-wife broken copyright law?
What penalty might be applied if it were proven?

The student builds a teleport and sells the design for $10,000,000,000. If he had downloaded the paper legitimately, he would have had to agree to split this in half with me but since he downloaded it from Google he was not obliged to make such an agreement.

Now, we can see that Google has harmed me financially. Does this change your legal opinions above?

Kaled.