March 06, 2007
It's always interesting when Microsoft decides to take a public stand against another company's business practices. More often than not we see this kind of behavior out of Redmond when they're not dominating an industry… but would like to be. Perhaps that's what the current Microsoft vs. Google on copyright infringement debacle is all about. Or maybe Microsoft really is concerned. I'll let you decide. Because I'm not going to get wrapped up in this one.
But for your reading pleasure, I've compiled a few choice tidbits from the debate going on in the blogosphere and beyond:
The Associated Press:
Microsoft is taking aim at Google Inc.'s rival book-scanning project, saying the search company "systematically violates copyright." In prepared remarks he is scheduled to deliver Tuesday to a publishing industry group, a Microsoft Corp. lawyer also said Google is cutting into the profits of authors and publishers.
"Companies that create no content of their own, and make money solely on the backs of other people's content, are raking in billions through advertising revenue," wrote Thomas C. Rubin, an associate general counsel at Microsoft, in the speech he planned to give at the annual meeting of the Association of American Publishers in New York. Source: AP via Yahoo News
The New York Times:
“In essence, Google is saying to you and to other copyright owners: ‘Trust us — you’re protected. We’ll keep the digital copies secure, we’ll only show snippets, we won’t harm you, we’ll promote you,’ ” he argues.
David Drummond, Google’s senior vice president for corporate development and its chief legal officer, said in response that Google worked with more than 10,000 publishing partners to make books searchable online and had recently added the BBC and N.B.A. as YouTube video partners.
“We do this by complying with international copyright laws,” Mr. Drummond said, “and the result has been more exposure and in many cases more revenue for authors, publishers and producers of content.” Source: The New York Times
The Financial Times:
Microsoft is trying to differentiate itself from Google by portraying itself as more sympathetic to copyright holders than Google, and has sent a letter to executives of big media conglomerates, offering to work with them to eliminate piracy from Soapbox, a new video service on MSN.
Patricia Schroeder, AAP president, said it had agreed to work with Microsoft and others to develop principles on responsible book search.
Google said it believed it was acting legally and ethically in providing snippets of in-copyright books and added that it removed books promptly when contacted by publishers. It said it generated more than $3.3bn of advertising revenues for other internet sites last year, which showed that it did not simply exploit the content of others. Source: The Financial Times
Google Watch:
Although the blogosphere would have you believe Microsoft's recent attack on Google's copyright policy is a big deal, truth is there's not much there there.
Quick and simple: 1) Microsoft has two competing book scanning programs (Live Search Academic and Live Search Books), and 2) Microsoft's business plan is not based on economies of scale of copyrighted works. Google's is.
Furthermore, what Microsoft's counsel said [removed link to full speech] has been said multiple times in multiple ways by the Association of American Publishers, the Authors Guild, and various and sundry other orgs that disagree with Google's stance on copyright. Fact, Microsoft has been griping about Google's copyright stance since they helped form the Open Content Allance in 2005. Source: Google Watch
C|Net:
Rubin and Microsoft are pointing fingers at Google's YouTube division and its book search program, both of which have had legal issues with copyright.
But bloggers argued this morning that Redmond's assault may be sparked more by fears that it is losing out in the search engine battle. And, they warned, those words could come back to haunt Microsoft later. Source: C|Net Blog
Search Engline Land:
Overall, I have to say it's disappointing seeing Microsoft come out on an attack stance rather than be positive about what it is doing. Google deserves slams, and I wish they'd change to an opt-in policy for copyrighted books. But for me, with perspective, Microsoft comes across as someone trying to play catch-up and willing to be negative to do it. I don't like that in political campaigns, and I guess I don't like it any more in the search wars. But most important, it's a dangerous game to play. The more Microsoft paints itself as some type of pure protector of copyright, the harder it will fall as people find examples where it fails to meet expectations. Source: Search Engine Land
Keeping in mind that the text of this speech was released to the press before it was actually delivered (Rubin is scheduled to deliver his speech today), what do you think Microsoft's motives for making such a big deal out of this are? Genuine concern? Or bitter brand trashing?
|
|
