3.6.07 MS to publishers: Fear Google, solve 'orphan works' problem

By Richard Koman - March 6, 2007

Microsoft launched an attack on Google's respect for copyright today. Speaking at a publishing conference, Tom Rubin, Microsoft's associate general counsel accused Google of encouraging salespeople to sell keywords on pirated software and illegal downloads of music and movies.

Text of Rubin's prepared remarks

Microsoft was surprised to learn recently that Google employees have actively encouraged advertisers to build advertising programs around key words referring to pirated software, including pirated Microsoft software. And we weren’t the only victims – Google also encouraged the use of keywords and advertising text referring to illegal copies of music and movies. These actions bolstered websites dedicated to piracy and reportedly netted Google around $800,000 in advertising revenues from just four such pirate sites.

At the end of a speech where he emphasized Microsoft's respect for copyright and castigated Google for treating it cavalierly, Rubin also told the publishing industry that it needs to update its act and make accomodations to the online world.

He especially called for two industries to come up with a solution to the orphan works problem - the fact that it's virtually impossible to find owners of many copyrights.

Online providers should make diligent efforts to locate copyright owners, but when they cannot locate the owner, there must be a process or a safety net by which they can move forward without risk of liability beyond payment of a reasonable royalty if the copyright holder later makes herself known."

He also told the publishers they need to realize that online customers expect to preview content before they buy it and that DRM can't be allowed to "frustrate customers' legitimate expectations."

The press coverage, of course, focused on the Google attack.

While Google says that it doesn’t currently intend to place ads next to book search results, Google’s broader business model is straightforward – attract as many users as possible to its site by providing what it considers to be “free” content, then monetize that content by selling ads. I think Pat Schroeder put it best when she said Google has “a hell of a business model – they’re going to take everything you create, for free, and sell advertising around it.”

In my view, Google has chosen the wrong path for the longer term, because it systematically violates copyright and deprives authors and publishers of an important avenue for monetizing their works. In doing so, it undermines critical incentives to create. This violates the second principle I mentioned.

Rubin says that Google's theory that it is merely making "fair use" of the materials is without merit. Rubin emphasizes that Microsoft respects "legitimate" fair use - it filed an amicus brief supporting an author's right to make use of material from "Gone With the Wind." But rather than explain why Google doesnt' have a fair use right to scan copyright materials, he says merely:

Rather than delve into this arcane legal issue, what we really should be asking is whether it would be possible for Google to provide its Book Search service in a way that respects copyright.

Rubin contrasts copyright-respecting Microsoft with off-the-reservation Google:

So, what we really have here are two fundamentally different paths. Google takes the position that everything may be freely copied unless the copyright owner notifies Google and tells it to stop. Microsoft and most other companies, by contrast, take the position that they should get the copyright owner’s consent before they copy. The Copyright Act, in our view, supports this approach. It’s hard to see any justification for exempting Google from its requirements.
                       Share with Bit.ly                    

March 6, 2007 | Permalink | Comment | Category: News Watch | Subscribe to SVW

Comments (3)

Tom Foremski:

MSFT is attacking GOOG's Achilles Heel. It pre-briefed all the major news outlets with this announcement. If MSFT can convince other media companies that GOOG is making billions of dollars of off other people's content through "Fair Use" and turning a blind eye to pirated content--it'll gain tremendous amounts of new business from content creators. And, it'll be able to cement its MSFT DRM technology into a tremendous amount of new content despite the remarks on "previewing" content.
MSFT would love to be the content management system for the Internet.

Posted: March 6, 2007 3:06 PM

Sramana Mitra:

I think, instead of trying to hog it all themselves, Google should simply open up the incentives for content producers to make money off their advertising strategy, similar to what they have done with AdSense.

Instead of "buying" books, in the future, we may "view" books, for free, and the authors would get paid via advertising.

Posted: March 6, 2007 5:03 PM

Tom Foremski:

Sramana: Great idea...and GOOG gets the revs for the older books that are now in the public domain.

But book reading is not a pleasant online experience, I'm sure it will change in the future as we get better types of mobile readers and technologies such as "smart" paper.

Posted: March 6, 2007 5:13 PM

Post a comment


tibco software
Silicon Valley Watcher Shop

Choose some images and the
products choose you!

Tom Foremski #28 on San Francisco - Silicon Valley Top 50 Most Influential
PR Week: Tom Foremski - top journalists you should know!
Bacon's names Silicon Valley Watcher one of the most influential blogs in the US.
In CNET's Top 100
blog100 149x46.jpg
Best Bay Area Blog
SF Publicity Club's ninth annual awards celebrating excellence in media.