Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
The ruling over copyright infringement has generally been that devices, sites, etc, which have significant non-infringing uses are permissible. Most people, I think, would agree that Google is primarily a non-infringing site, whereas the primary purpose of the site against which this ruling has been made is to give people access to copyright-infringing material.
|
That's laughable, Google is the biggest copyright infringer in the world, but they also have a very large team of lawyers...
Plenty of people don't believe in copyright, why should they not be allowed to read or listen or watch anything that they wish to? Because someone else does believe in copyright? That's just silly.
Although if the "governments" of the world continue along this path, the new era should be harried into existence quicker than previously imagined.