[mathprof]

[af_vet_rr]

I wonder if this will affect people posting pics/thumbnails here and elsewhere (I'm talking non-adult stuff, just thumbnails of whatever)...granted Google generates revenue from searches, and in this case this company sells images that are thumbnail size, but it raises some concerns for future litigation.

[VRWCmember]

Google should simply block this company's websites from coming up in any searches. Problem solved. Of course that might reduce the number of hits and sales on the firm's website.

[thulldud]

The judge ruled that because Google receives advertising money from offering search functions, it is not entitled to the same level of free use of the images as other entities would be.

Interesting. This is essentially the position of the operators of Scroogle. Google is appropriating the content which others are freely sharing to generate revenue for themselves. Something rotten there.

[mysterio]

Boy, that's bad news. Hope Google appeals. This copyright infringement by the big evil internet stuff is bunk.

[weegee]

Matz's ruling also notes that because Perfect 10 sells similar-size versions of its images to cell phone users through a separate company, Fonestarz Media, Perfect 10 stands to lose revenue if its request for a court order blocking Google's use of the thumbnails is not granted.

Good that they can make money selling thumbnail sized images but I don't understand why there is even a market for them. And Perfect 10 may get their images off Google but they may lose their customer base to Google's other thumbnail searches where a user could probably come up with 1.5million matching images in a few seconds.

And Perfect 10 will no longer receive any new customers BECAUSE of a Google Image Search that someone follows back to the host site for MORE (and bigger) pictures.

Companies can opt out of Google. Is there any HTML or Javascript they can put in their webpages to block ALL crawling spiders from mining their sites? The nature of the internet is it is a WEB. Granted Google has "copied" and "stored" other companies images. Without thumbnails you would just get text displays of file names.

[madprof98]

From another article posted here on FreeRepublic:

Matz was appointed to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California by President Clinton in March 1998 on the recommendation of California Senator Barbara Boxer, who argued at the time that Matz had "a deep commitment to justice."

[snarks_when_bored]

Those thumbnail pics are way too small to be useful seen anyway...

[Revolting cat!]

Good decision. What's the use of thumbnails? We demand full size!

[weegee]

I've seen several articles on this that headline the porn content of this case but this decision would affect all websites and content.

[adam_az]

They could configure their web server to prevent this.

My guess is they just want to sue Google and fish for a settlement.

[Always Right]

The judge ruled that because Google receives advertising money from offering search functions, it is not entitled to the same level of free use of the images as other entities would be.

Funny that was a factor in this ruling, but it did not seem to help out FreeRepublic by not receiving advertising dollars.