Quote:
Originally Posted by WT Sharpe
It strikes me as so bizarre that quite frankly I wonder if the article's author even has her facts right or, if she does, is she drawing the correct conclusions from those facts?
|
I would argue that the author's inference is incorrect and alarmist. The patent filing, as noted, was from 2004 and I don't see any evidence in the article that lends any credence to any plans to charge for previews or to "Search Inside the Book" (as stated in the article title).