Hui's JOMC221 Journal

According to the legal definition, “the fair-use rule is a privilege in others than the owner of the copyright to use the copyrighted material in a reasonable manner without his consent. The reasonableness of a use is determined on a case-by-case basis applying an equitable rule of reason analysis.” The fact that it is determined based on the case makes it a good topic for speculation and opinions and an especially good one for lawyers. Readers, journalists and business people are all interested parties, but in the legal sense, it is all about the money and Web hits. Journalists and Journalism students, like us, are more like spectators.

Ironically, I found out about this case on Google. I would never have found the information from WorldCat, FindLaw.com or Lexis Nexis, legal, academic or otherwise (1). I would have never heard of AFP and I would not have visited their site without the story registering on a search engine. Search engines are vital top sites that serve an important role for Web users. I write ‘vital’ in terms of the users and their experience.

From AFP’s perspective, any viewers sent from Google are a benefit. Yahoo, on the other hand, pays some sources for the right to use their headlines. Google might have felt that the number of viewers it sends to sites like AFP made it untouchable. I am sure AFP appreciates any extra traffic. I am sure Google deserves respect from AFP, but from a business point of view, ‘deserve’ has nothing to do with it. It would be irresponsible for AFP not to chase royalties from Google. Their profile is higher even if they lose. Google would still send viewers even if they lose. There is no downside for AFP.

I view AFP’s position as understandable, but side with Google in this dispute. I side with users and think that content should be user-oriented. It is a nice idea. Coincidentally, this week’s headlines also include Barry Diller’s company buying AskJeeves.com for 1.9 billion. The future of search engines will be driven by commercial imperatives. Nice interfaces and relevant results aside, the business is the vital thing.

I searched through the top ten hits on Yahoo! and Google search engines as well as Google News, among others, and found some interesting results.

With the Google search engine, eight of the top ten results for the keywords ‘Google fair use French’ were for an article by Anick Jesdanun of The Associated Press (AP). AP sold the article to least eight different Web sites. Google happened to have eight them on the first page of its results list. On the Yahoo! search engine, half of the top ten hits pointed to the same Jesdanun article. Remarkably, the first hit was a Google site. One was an irrelevant site, another was a Blog. This is significant, because Blogs often have links to commercial sites and a pro-AFP ruling would limit Blogs.

Most surprising of all were the results from Google News itself. Only one of the top ten results led to the Jesdanun article. It is hard for non-technical people to appreciate why some results come and why others do not, but quid pro quo is one easy explanation. At any rate, educating the public or promoting Blogs is not AFP’s concern.

As for me, I do not think Google competes with AFP. Google only takes a little bit from various sites. These are the two most significant points with regards to fair use. I predict Google and AFP will settle out of court.

(1) Lexis-Shmexus! Six of the top ten hits for a “Google fair use French’ search were the same Jesdanun article, available freely elsewhere. Lexis-Nexis normally charges $3.00 for access to each search hit on their site. Lexis-Nexis probably kicks back money to news sources, just like Yahoo! does. Does it pay Bloggers for original material? I do not think so. Nice business model, isn’t it? In fact, this Web essay is brought to you by Pam. Why have food stick to your frying pan? Use Pam.

Now, I have to get them to pay me.

Interesting/related sites:

http://www.searchengineguide.com/beal/2004/0204_ab1.html

http://searchenginewatch.com/

// posted by Hui Liu @ 3/27/2005 04:30:00 PM