Google Loses Copyright Fight in Europe

A report in the International Herald Tribune says Google suffered a major blow in a Belgian court, in a decision that sets a precedent for what will doubtless mean more, comparable losses. The Brussels Court of First Instance determined that when the search engine juggernaut published links to a European newspaper, doing so without express permission of the paper, it was a violation of copyright laws.

The court further required Google pay $32,500 per day until it removes every fragment of Belgian news content from its pages.

The search-engine organization has promised to appeal the decision.

Copiepresse, a group representing seventeen European newspapers, said in its lawsuit that Google shouldn't be permitted to link to their sites for free. Newspaper attorney David Hooper, of London, commented, "There is a tendency for Google to use things for free and reach a deal later." He said in the future, Google and other search engines will need to "make it worthwhile for newspapers to cooperate." While the decision Tuesday, February 13, was specific to Google, Copiepresse has announced plans to address Yahoo and other search programs, as well.

Newspaper spokesman Fracois Le Hodey, CEO of La Libre Belgique, claims that newspaper content creates massive traffic for Google, and that Google should be required to distribute some of the revenue to those who actually created the content.

Yahoo received a formal notice from Copiepresse in January. Spokesman Margaret Boribon said it won't be the last such notification for Google's competitor.

Not Just In Europe And Not Just Newspapers

The European suit is part of a worldwide movement, one in which newspaper publishers are seeking to force search engines to pay for links to articles and photos. In the original action, filed in September, the papers won a court order forcing Google to purge every link to their content. The penalty for failure was a €1 million ($1.3 million US) per day. Google officials say the content has been removed. European interests argue that some content is still on Google pages.

It's not only in Europe, nor are newspapers the only ones claiming that Google violated copyright laws. In September of 2005, the Authors Guild, a Lincoln biographer, a children's book author, and a former Poet Laureate of the United States jointly filed a class-action suit in New York, saying that the search engine company was illegally posting copyrighted material through its Library program.

In that case, Google had an agreement with four academic libraries (Stanford, Harvard, Oxford and the University of Michigan) and the New York Public Library, gathering library permissions for digital transmission of their content. The authors claim they weren't afforded the same courtesy.

Publishers got in on the story in 2005, too. A consortium of five major publishing houses - The McGraw-Hill Companies, Pearson Education, Penguin Group (USA), Simon & Schuster and John Wiley & Sons - filed the action, also saying it was illegal for Google to rake in millions by "freeloading."

In that instance, Google fired back that its actions fell within the same category as book reviews. It said its purpose in scanning in the books was to help raise awareness of specific works and to promote sales thereof.

YouTube Adds Fuel To The Fire

The bar was raised when Google agreed to purchase the video file sharing site YouTube in 2006. The video site was sued for copyright infringement even before it was acquired by the search engine, but with the newer and deeper pockets of a parent company, YouTube has become part of a very prominent target. While so far the only high-profile lawsuit against YouTube was tied to a video of the 1992 Los Angeles riots, a purchase by Google brought big money into the picture. Can a string of lawsuits be far behind?

Money The Last Word

In the end, it all comes down to money: who controls it and how everyone receives. Newspapers, authors and publishing houses aren't opposed to the search-engine giant linking to their pages. They simply want Google to pay for the privilege.

Google attorney Yoram Elkaim summed up what the European decision really represents, explaining, "This judgment doesn't stop us negotiating."