Very interesting article in the Wall
Street Journal yesterday on how
Google's efforts to move into video search efforts are stepping on the
toes of those who actually own the content, like Major League Baseball,
Viacom, NBC, Comcast
I have to say that, not only from this article but also from the Google Library episode, Google seems to be either naive about the importance of content to those who actually create (as opposed to search) it, OR their business model is just to proceed with doing whatever the heck they intend to do, and then back off only when threatened. That's a rather bullheaded approach, but it's exactly the kind of approach you might expect from a company run by young people who have tons of money in their pockets and have never experienced failure.
There seems to be a "we can do whatever we want--we're young and successful" attitude about Google. Or perhaps an "it's easier to get forgiveness than permission" attitude.
But intellectual property law is based on permission, not forgiveness. In fact, that's sorta what the whole injunctions debate within the patent reform legislation in the U.S. hinges on, isn't it?
From the article . . .
The story tells us that Major League Baseball had to be informed by a reporter that Google was building a database of baseball games, including video clips and still images, that had been shown on TV. They just didn't bother to even talk to MLB first.
The story also mentions that Google's market cap easily exceed's Viacom's, yet Viacom has seven times Google's revenue. Sound familiar? Sound ominous?
I have to say that, not only from this article but also from the Google Library episode, Google seems to be either naive about the importance of content to those who actually create (as opposed to search) it, OR their business model is just to proceed with doing whatever the heck they intend to do, and then back off only when threatened. That's a rather bullheaded approach, but it's exactly the kind of approach you might expect from a company run by young people who have tons of money in their pockets and have never experienced failure.
There seems to be a "we can do whatever we want--we're young and successful" attitude about Google. Or perhaps an "it's easier to get forgiveness than permission" attitude.
But intellectual property law is based on permission, not forgiveness. In fact, that's sorta what the whole injunctions debate within the patent reform legislation in the U.S. hinges on, isn't it?
From the article . . .
Google started talking to TV executives about its video plans last year, say Google and the TV companies. Discussions intensified in meetings in December and early January in cities such as New York, Los Angeles and Washington.
Then Google surprised some broadcasters by telling it was already building a digital database of their programs . . . Rick Cotton, general counsel at General Electric Co.'s NBC Universal, says Google's "stunning approach" brought talks to a halt. "This is not the way one normally does business whether you're an old company or a young one," he says.
The story tells us that Major League Baseball had to be informed by a reporter that Google was building a database of baseball games, including video clips and still images, that had been shown on TV. They just didn't bother to even talk to MLB first.
The story also mentions that Google's market cap easily exceed's Viacom's, yet Viacom has seven times Google's revenue. Sound familiar? Sound ominous?
Update: I just checked, and the Google Video search service requires that you download and install the Google Video Viewer program, which is under the GPL. So perhaps it's no wonder that Google seems relatively unconcerned about IP protection . . .