Copyright theft or enhancing the user experience??

[SteveGerencser]

Google Fast Flip (http://fastflip.googlelabs.com/)

Google labs are testing a new search results display method.. Do you think this a step too far or a cool thing to do??

[wige]

It is interesting. In it's current form, I don't think there would be a problem; they seem to be aiming this as kind of a virtual magazine rack, and the publishers are opting in. If it expands beyond it's current form, though... I don't know.

That being said, in its current form I don't really find this feature particularly, uh, useful. Honestly, I think a text blurb from the article would be a lot more likely to get me to click one of the results.

If it came to a copyright challenge, my non-lawerly guess would be that Google would call it fair use, and probably prevail. A current and common fair use claim is that a representative image of diminished resolution and size for the purpose of conveying an incomplete overview of the actual product would be acceptable and fair use. This is an argument that Wikipedia, Ask, and a few other organizations have used, and web page thumbnails in search results aren't exactly new.

That said, who doesn't think the AP is already drafting their lawsuit?

[cw1865]

If they have the permission of the publishers, its obviously ok. I think the case of President Ford's memoirs illustrates the standard to use to see if this is a copyright infringement or not:

I think this quote illustrates the doctrine best:
The amount of the Nation's use of Ford's memoirs was not very large; the District Court determined that only 300 words in the Nation's article were copyright protected. However, the District Court concluded that these 300 words were "qualitatively substantial, constituting the "heart of the book." The Supreme Court therefore determined that this factor weighed against a finding of fair use.

President Ford's Memoirs

President Ford contracted with Harper & Row to publish his memoirs. Harper & Row then contracted with Time magazine the exclusive right to publish, one week before the book would be shipped, a 7500 word excerpt from the book. The Nation magazine obtained a copy of the Ford manuscript several weeks before Time's publication of the article and published its own 2,250 word article that included quotes, phrases and facts from the manuscript. Following the publication of the Nation article, Time canceled publication of its article and did not pay remaining monies that were due Harper & Row. Harper & Row then proceeded to sued the Nation for copyright infringement.

This case eventually wound up in the Supreme Court where the Court found in favor of Harper & Row and against the Nation's argument of fair use. The Court's analysis of the four factors was as follows:

Purpose of Use - Although the Court agreed that news reporting was a favored purpose "the fact that a publication was commercial as opposed to nonprofit is a separate factor that tends to weight against a finding of fair use." The Court in determining this factor weighed against a finding of fair use emphasized the "Nation's stated objective of scooping the forthcoming book and Time article.

Nature of the Copyrighted Work - Despite the fact that the Court recognized a greater need to disseminate factual works than fictional works, the Court concluded, based upon the unpublished status of Ford's memoirs and the fact that it was up to the author to control publication, that this factor weighed against a finding of fair use.

Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used - The amount of the Nation's use of Ford's memoirs was not very large; the District Court determined that only 300 words in the Nation's article were copyright protected. However, the District Court concluded that these 300 words were "qualitatively substantial, constituting the "heart of the book." The Supreme Court therefore determined that this factor weighed against a finding of fair use.

Market Effect - The Court stated that the market effect "is undoubtedly the most important element of fair use." In analyzing this factor the Court concluded that "[r]arely will a case of copyright infringement present such clear-cut evidence of damage", and that any inquiry into this factor must take into account any damage to the original work as well as to any "harm to the market for derivative works." Needless to say, the Court concluded that this factor weighed against a finding of fair use.
In summary, the Supreme Court concluded that all four factors weighed against finding a fair use defense for the Nation's publication of the article based on President Ford's memoirs.

Fair Use: Interpretation and Guidelines - The Fair Use Doctrine, Part II (http://www.publaw.com/fairuse.html)

[fulleffect]

I cant see how this would rival the current results display, as the cost of bandwidth would far outweight any benefits... I've always wanted to see a small thumb next to each search result though, and i think you can get a firefox plugin for this anyway....

[Doc]

Google Fast Flip (http://fastflip.googlelabs.com/)

Google labs are testing a new search results display method.. Do you think this a step too far or a cool thing to do??

For my own part, I prefer the current display method, but that's probably partly because I'm an old fuddy-duddy, and I'm more comfortable with what I'm used to. I think the idea's a good one, but without either clicking on the link, or letting my FF CoolPreviews open a popup, I found even many of the headlines too small to make out. Chalk it up to old eyes?

As for copyright infringement, if they all opted in, no issue. And my personal feelings are, even if they didn't, tough-stuff! I think the cameo that opens up, via the Google page is short enough to constitute fair use, and if you click on the Read Full Article link, you're taken outside of Google, directly to the publisher's site.

My 2¢ worth. ;)

[deepsand]

I've had personal experience over the course of the past 5 years with several publishers offering similar display methods for their own publications.

In all cases I found the results to be visually distracting from the editorial content, which was my intended focus, to the point of being physically tiresome on my eyes.

[scgalvin]

I think it's very cool. Is it only for blogs and articles or will it be for all sites?

I would think it could be a handy tool at times, would be a nice option to be able to switch on and off.

[deepsand]

If one understands the physiology involved in reading, one will also know that much of what is deemed "cool" is physically very inefficient, that it requires both the eye and brain to do unnecessary extra work, resulting in both eye fatigue and loss of concentration.

Unfortunately, far too many are today enamored of "cool," "now," or "happening," such that they ignore the maxim that "Form follows Function," producing results that, while visually stimulating, actually serve to defeat the underlying purpose, that of providing materials that are easily and tirelessly read.

[crankydave]

It's just another means to keep a visitor on Google longer, and display ads for the user to click on.

I want the vistor on my site... quickly. Since when is making a visitor have to click more to get to what they're actually looking for a good thing?... When you're Google and you want them to click on ads that make you money using content that's not yours.

MFA anyone?

Dave

[deepsand]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MFA may refer to:


Made For Ads
Made for AdSense
Mail filtering agent
Malaysian Fling Academy A18 Legend
Malta Football Association
Marine and Fisheries Agency of England and Wales
Master of Fine Arts
Material Flow Accounting
Material Flow Analysis
Mauritius Football Association
Mean field annealing — a computer algorithm similar to simulated annealing
Mercy for Animals
Metabolic flux analysis
Midland Football Alliance
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Missouri Farmers Association
Montserrat Football Association
Movimento das Forças Armadas
Mouvement des Forces de l'Avenir, a political party in Cote d'Ivoire
Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, Massachusetts
Music for America
Multi-Factor Authentication
Multi Fibre Arrangement, a system of textile export quotas expired on January 1, 2005

[innominds]

MFA generally means Made for Adsense.
Google doesn't like these sort of sites.

[deepsand]

MFA generally means Made for Adsense.
Google doesn't like these sort of sites.
Well, if that's the case, then, :

Why does Google both market AdSense and allow those ads to appear on sites specifically designed for displaying such?

Why is Google previewing a feature that itself is MFA?


BTW, in this case the more appropriate meaning of MFA is "Made for ads." The feature under discussion allows for 3rd party ads to be displayed as part of the content provided by the publisher of the editorial content.

[cw1865]

Google's ad distribution is akin to a manufacturer selling @ retail and selling at wholesale to resellers. They would very much prefer that you hit the ad through google itself (ie. make the retail sale direct).

[deepsand]

Assuming that the analogs here are AdWords listings displayed on Google's pages and AdSense listing appearing on affiliates sites, that is of course self-evident.

However, if the latter provides marginal income that the former cannot, what is to gain by discouraging the latter?

If these are not the analogs of which you speak, then I'm missing your meaning.