Monday, September 17, 2007

THE IRVINGS IN NEW BRUNSWICK = A reader brings up a good point!!!

Pictures 161
Originally uploaded by Oldmaison
A Canadian publisher using an American law to try to force the removal of material from a blog written by a Canadian based on US jurisprudence?

A key issue is here is infringement. Does the publication of copyright material in this blog result in the loss of value to the copyright holder?

In other words, do the Irving papers in question suffer an economic loss as a result? Or is this simply schoolyard bullying dolled up in a suit and tie?

- anonymouse


Anonymous said...

The "american law" is very relevant because Google is an American company. It makes no difference where the blogger is located. The blogger is using the services of an American company, and software hosted in the USA. US law is relevant. If Charles was using a Canadian blogging service, American law would be irrelevant... but he's not.

Anonymous said...

Your publisher, Google, is an American company. American law applies.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps someone should report that cat from Brunswick "News" to Blogger. He was posting under the Blogger Identity "ce"...clearly he's not using it to blog with. I'm sure that signing up for a blogger account to stalk others is against Blogger's Terms of Service.

Anonymous said...

According to the notice sent you by Google, your grace period to remove those copyrighted articles has expired already. I'd be ready for things to go dark anytime now Charles. Hope you backed things up.

Anonymous said...

... And the copyrighted blog entries are gone. Can't say you weren't warned Charles, Google told you what they would do if you refused to pull the articles. Google's next step if you re-offend would be total shut down.

Dragon said...

Unfortunately, I don't know copyright laws that well. But I thought it was alright to post someone else's material so long as you do NOT claim it as your own and provide a reference as to where the material is from.

Anonymous said...

I don't understand copyright rules (at all) when it comes to the internet. For instance, sites like Bourque Newswatch or National Newswatch make money from advertisements generated from traffic searching out their newslinks posted from many other media organizations online news sites. Should they be allowed to profit from using other people property? Are they violating copyright laws?

I think the only reason media organizations allow it to continue is twofold. Firtly, they know that the links point taffic in their direction. And lastly, they know that the print media is going by the wayside and don't want to rock-the-boat with what could be the wave of the future.

Which is why I find canadaeast's actions a bit puzzling, even though they are correct.

Anonymous said...

Make no mistake, the Charles Leblanc blog is certainly NOT the "wave of the future" when it comes to news and information. If it is, someone please gouge out my eyes now and save me the trouble!