link to Google News instead of AP?

[Cycling in Hollywood]

Here's an idea to circumvent the AP rules: instead of linking to the article, just do a Google News search for the title of the article and then link to that:

http://news.google.com/news?q=King%20salmon%20vanishing%20in%20Alaska%2C%20smokehouses%20empty&oe=utf-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wn

Would this be acceptable?

[dpwozney]

Why is Google, a for-profit company, allowed to link to AP articles while other people are not allowed?

Why doesn't the MSM also target Google? Why do copyright rules not apply for Google as well?

[PseudoPhil]

Google is TBTF.. and if they can't link to your pages, you effectively don't exist.

[dpwozney]

Google is TBTF.. and if they can't link to your pages, you effectively don't exist.

Does Google not have any effective competition?  If so, why not?

[PseudoPhil]

Google's market share is over 80%. They are more than 4 times bigger than all of their competitors combined.

[dpwozney]

Google copies, onto their own computers, copyrighted content from other companies and people without their prior knowledge or consent. Google then makes available and visible, to all people on the internet, this copyrighted content. Google makes money selling advertising that is visible to people who are accessing this copyrighted content. How is this not in violation of copyright law?

[PseudoPhil]

There is a "fair use" clause in the copyright law. Once something is published, one can cite portions of the published material in order to comment on it, or in the case of Google, to provide an indexing service for those looking for material related to the subject of the published material. The copyright is really only violated if "substantial" portions of the material are reproduced without permission and without citing the source and indicating the holder of the copyright for the material.

At least, that's my understanding of the gist of it. I'm not a copyright lawyer.

[dpwozney]

My understanding with “fair use” is that if you're selling for profit, it's not fair use. Google, for profit, sells web page space containing and/or linking ads which space is visible to people accessing copyrighted content. Google copies, onto their own computers, this copyrighted content from other companies and people without their prior knowledge or consent.

[PseudoPhil]

The act of publishing copyrighted material implies knowledge that the material will be accessed by the public at large, and also implies consent for that access. The only information which requires prior consent by the copyright holder before copies are made would be unpublished confidential information, such trade secrets. Once information is made public, it can no longer be considered confidential.

Google does not sell access to material copyrighted by others without their consent. It sells advertising space on the pages it generates itself. It provides links to information copyrighted by others for free.

[dpwozney]

Google copies and uses copyrighted material for the purpose of making a profit. This copyrighted material  is copied by Google without prior expressed written permission. In copyright law, the copying, publishing, or distributing of copyrighted works for profit without prior expressed written permission is illegal.