In Parker v. Google, No. 04 CV 3918 (E.D. Pa. 2006), District Judge R. Barclay Surrick ruled that automatic caching of Usenet posts is neither direct or contributory copyright infringement.
When an ISP automatically and temporarily stores data without human intervention so that the system can operate and transmit data to its users, the necessary element of volition is missing. The automatic activity of Google’s search engine is analogous. It is clear that Google’s automatic archiving of USENET postings and excerpting of websites in its results to users’ search queries do not include the necessary volitional element to constitute direct copyright infringement.
William Patry: Parker v. Google: "The direct infringement holding in Parker may be a very welcome harbinger that courts are becoming more realistic about the way the Internet works and moving, finally, away from the misreading of 'copy' perpetuated by MAI v. Peak."
Kevin Delaney, The Wall St. Journal: Google Wins Copyright Battle; Archiving Issue Is Still Unclear: "Some legal experts said the ruling, issued last week in a case brought by Internet publisher Gordon Roy Parker in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, could influence judges in other cases pending against Google, potentially bolstering the Internet company's legal defenses. Those cases include high-profile suits brought last year by writers and publishers and by the Agence France-Presse news agency alleging that Google's services violate copyright."
Post a Comment