Quote:
Originally Posted by rlauzon
You are mistaken about the content of Google's database. Google is not researching who owns what works. Rather they are relying on the rights owners to come forward and let Google know that they own some of the works.
|
Sure, and that's why it's useful. It's going to be a pretty good database of the major authors and publishing houses rights to electronic editions. Again, I'm in no way suggesting that it's comprehensive, but it will deal with the vast majority of pirate works.
Sure, they might be "well known", but the problem as this has illustrated is a problem with well known works and Amazon's (non)filtering in the first place!
Quote:
|
According to Larry Lessig, about 80% of works currently under copyright have no known rights owners.
|
Sorry, taking that with a very large pinch of salt - does that apply to just books or to all published works, including electronic publishing?
Quote:
|
And to further complicate matters, there's no penalty for claiming to hold a copyright when you don't.
|
Oh sure there is, if you've profited from it. If you make an explicit penalty for the claim itself, then you're in danger of creating a situation of more money being the arbitrator of who owns copyright (more than at present, I mean).