nanog mailing list archives
[OT] Re: Don't Cache that check
From: Douglas Dever <dougdever () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 15:19:33 -0400
On 9/21/05, J. Oquendo <sil () politrix org> wrote:
Might or might not be offtopic: http://wendy.seltzer.org/media/AuthorsGuild-v-Google.pdf I wonder what this will do for you ISP guys out there that use Cache servers. Technically if the suit holds, your company too would be violating laws. Which makes me wonder... If I listened to say a streaming audio clip of an unreleased album... That album goes to my computer's cache, can I be sued if I turn around and sell my cache. ;)
It will have zero impact on people running caching servers... Please see points 2 through 5 in the nature of the action. Specifically, "Google knew or should have known... to obtain authorization from the holders of the copyrights in these literary works before creating and reproducing digital copies of the Works for its own commercial use..." Somewhere, there's a shepard listening for your cries of "Wolf..." -doug
Current thread:
- Don't Cache that check J. Oquendo (Sep 21)
- [OT] Re: Don't Cache that check Douglas Dever (Sep 21)
- Re: Don't Cache that check Simon Lockhart (Sep 21)
- Re: Don't Cache that check eric (Sep 21)
- Re: Don't Cache that check james edwards (Sep 21)
- Re: Don't Cache that check Bruce Robertson (Sep 21)
- Re: Don't Cache that check Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 21)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Don't Cache that check J. Oquendo (Sep 21)
- Re: Don't Cache that check trainier (Sep 21)
- RE: Don't Cache that check Hannigan, Martin (Sep 21)