[d@DCC] Unintended consequences of treating the anonymous part of the Internet as other than BY-NC-ND

[James McKinney]

mskala at ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:

>On Mon, 23 May 2005 mskala at ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
>  
>
>>look like they wrote it.  Neither Google nor archive.org nor any
>>responsibly-run system similar to them that I can imagine would fail to
>>attribute the source of publicly-archived content, and one that did would
>>be breaking the implied license.
>>    
>>
>Sidelight:  Google, and some other Usenet archive operators, do come
>dangerously close to failing to provide proper attribution on Usenet
>archives, by making it look like Usenet is part of their operation instead
>of their operation being part of Usenet.  I don't think they're quite at
>the point where they could be prosecuted, but I do know some people who
>seriously claim that Google and other parties are infringing copyright on
>a massive scale with Usenet-archiving operations.
>  
>
Usenet is just a technology. Google is just offering access to Usenet. 
To say Google infringes copyright by doing so is like saying that Bell 
infringes copyright by offering web access. The world wide web is just a 
technology, too.

James