Google Loses Cache-Copyright Lawsuit in Belgium

Google Loses Cache-Copyright Lawsuit in Belgium 340

Posted by Zonk on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @10:51AM from the no-convenience-for-you dept.

acroyear writes "A court in Belgium has found that Google's website caching policies are a violation of that nation's copyright laws. The finding is that Google's cache offers effectively free access to articles that, while free initially, are archived and charged for via subscriptions. Google claims that they only store short extracts, but the court determined that's still a violation. From the court's ruling: 'It would be up to copyright owners to get in touch with Google by e-mail to complain if the site was posting content that belonged to them. Google would then have 24 hours to withdraw the content or face a daily fine of 1,000 euros ($1,295 U.S.).'"

Google Loses Cache-Copyright Lawsuit in Belgium

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Search 340 Comments Log In/Create an Account

Comments Filter:

Har Har (Score:5, Informative)

by N8F8 ( 4562 ) writes: on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @10:53AM (#17996922)

The ruling basically reiterates the current Google policy.

Re:Personal Responsibility (Score:4, Informative)

by kimvette ( 919543 ) writes: on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @11:09AM (#17997144) Homepage Journal

Sorry that was the browser cache.

THIS is the correct tag:

<META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOARCHIVE">

Sorry about the brain fart. I wish we could edit posts (preview, I know, but that would not have made me catch this one)

Re:What about MY memory, is that a cache? (Score:4, Informative)

by Potor ( 658520 ) writes: <farker1&gmail,com> on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @11:14AM (#17997196) Journal

Actually, the action was begun by French- and German-language papers and adjudicated in a Brussels court, and thus has nothing to do with anything Flemish.

Re:Not in terms of copyright law (Score:3, Informative)

by 91degrees ( 207121 ) writes: on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @11:18AM (#17997258) Journal

Yes it is different. In most countries, unauthorised distribution carries much heavier penalties than unauthorised possession (which may indeed have no penalty atttached at all).

Re:What's the problem? (Score:2, Informative)

by that this is not und ( 1026860 ) writes: on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @11:22AM (#17997332)

That doesn't matter. Publishers of those free urban tabloids still retain copyright on the articles and graphics given away for free in the tabloids.

Implications for proxies (Score:3, Informative)

by l2718 ( 514756 ) writes: on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @11:25AM (#17997380)

What do this say about proxy services, then? These also store content which may be subject to copyright and serve it to users.

Re:So no "fair dealing" or "fair use" in Belgium? (Score:3, Informative)

by radja ( 58949 ) writes: on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @11:55AM (#17997854) Homepage

the EU has a copyright directive. it's up to the individual countries to make it into a national law, so copyright law still differs across countries in the EU.

Re:So no "fair dealing" or "fair use" in Belgium? (Score:2, Informative)

by CH-BuG ( 55283 ) writes: on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @01:03PM (#17998922) Homepage

You could publish in an open-access journal. Alternatively, 90% of the publishers now accept that you put your articles (pre or post prints, depending on the case) in an institutional repository. Does your university provide one?

Re:Har Har (Score:5, Informative)

by Seehund ( 86897 ) writes: on Tuesday February 13, 2007 @08:14PM (#18005696) Homepage Journal

It seems to me that Google should arrange something like noarchive specifically for these news quotes. Then every news site can easily specify what to allow, and they have no reason to sue.
Then it doesn't seem there's a reason to sue, as this is already implemented:

"To prevent all search engines from showing a "Cached" link for your site, place this tag in the <HEAD> section of your page:

<META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOARCHIVE">

To allow other search engines to show a "Cached" link, preventing only Google from displaying one, use the following tag:
<META NAME="GOOGLEBOT" CONTENT="NOARCHIVE"> "

There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.

Google Loses Cache-Copyright Lawsuit in Belgium 340

Google Loses Cache-Copyright Lawsuit in Belgium More Login

Google Loses Cache-Copyright Lawsuit in Belgium

Har Har (Score:5, Informative)

Re:Personal Responsibility (Score:4, Informative)

Re:What about MY memory, is that a cache? (Score:4, Informative)

Re:Not in terms of copyright law (Score:3, Informative)

Re:What's the problem? (Score:2, Informative)

Implications for proxies (Score:3, Informative)

Re:So no "fair dealing" or "fair use" in Belgium? (Score:3, Informative)

Re:So no "fair dealing" or "fair use" in Belgium? (Score:2, Informative)

Re:Har Har (Score:5, Informative)

Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.

Slashdot Top Deals

Slashdot