Google Sued for Copyright Infringement & Unfair Competition

1 comment
Thread Title:
Pornographer sues Google on 12 grounds
Thread Description:

Seems that Google may be in hot water for Copyright infringement - a porn mag (http:/*/ is claiming this and unfair competition over use of their images by Google. We talked about copyright and search engines just last week. and in that thread Woz said:

Basically the SEs are working in reverse to copyright law and often cross the line IMO. My prediction is that one day there will be a major court action which will shake up the SE business big time.

Here's a couple of quotes from John Palfrey's blog (threadlinked above):

A pornography publisher, Perfect 10 -- I'm sure you could find it if even I don't link to it! -- filed suit in federal district court in California against Google and 100 does yesterday on Friday, November 19, 2004, according to the complaint (I have redacted the complaint to remove pages 36 - 54, which include graphic images). Perfect 10's 12 claims listed in the complaint include alleged infringements of copyright, trademark, and right of publicity as well as unfair competition.

In short, Perfect 10 says: Google is profiting -- a lot -- from the bad acts of others and they should stop doing it and pay us for what they've done. Unpack the logic and it gets tortured pretty quickly (I'm sure Perfect 10 has *never* gotten any of its purported 100,000 unique visitors per month from Google nor have any of them paid the $25.50 per month for access), but the gist of their argument is plain. I suspect that Perfect 10 will not be the last to go after Google's riches with such a series of claims.

and some more from this Red Herring story

Most of the violations alleged by Perfect 10 are copyright claims. The suit states that Google’s search results pull up photos of nude female models that belong to Perfect 10. These search results, according to the suit, constitute an infringement. Google’s search picks up the photos from other Internet locations, which are described in the lawsuit as “stolen content sites,” or web sites that steal images and allow Internet users to avoid paying subscription or membership fees for members-only pornography web sites. charges $25.50 per month and counts 100,000 visitors per month.

According to the suit, because Google profits from the misdeeds of others on the web, it is legally and financially responsible for the alleged violations.

Should be fun eh?



So many people picked up on this since we first reported it over the weekend, why are the BBC always the last?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.