Google has stumbled a step in its path towards world domination after a court in France ruled that the search engine company is breaking French law with its Google Books project, handing down a daily fine equivalent to $15,000 until the data in question is completely removed.
The case marks yet another instance in which the European Union and its member nations have exhibited a more progressive stance on copyright protection, and more aggressive stance against corporate interests, as evidenced by their recent $1.5 billion fine against Microsoft.
Last night I watched a truly inspiring interview on the Daily Show in which John Stewart interviewed a young man from Malawi named William Kamkwamba, who built a windmill to generate electricity for his village after reading a textbook he found in his local library.
When I need to know about SEO, I don’t go to some spammy search marketing scientician who claims to have reverse-engineered Google. I go to the source: Matt Cutts. But while reading Matt’s blog the other day and noticed that he had taken umbrage at a study claiming that two-thirds of Americans object to online tracking (only 66 percent?). Matt’s objection is that that one of the authors of the study, Chris Jay Hoofnagle, did not disclose his affiliation with the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), an advocacy group that has lobbied to have both Gmail and Google Docs shut down. Could this be a flame war in the making?
I admit it: I’m a lazy bastard. I was recently given an assignment to investigate the marketing activities at my local library, and despite the fact that I live only half a mile from the Sunnyvale Public Library, I decided to investigate only the library’s online marketing efforts.
I was recently asked to provide my thoughts on cultural diversity and collection development for under-represented communities, which is kind of like asking an Amish person how to use a computer.
But since I was being graded on my response, I had to give it the old graduate school try.
Information wants to be free. It wants to be freely sought out, expressed, and received. In fact, the United Nations has declared that humans have a right to seek, receive and impart information. While the First Amendment grants us freedom of expression, and the Freedom of Information Act gives us limited access to government data, the right to seek out and receive information is not guaranteed by the Constitution, even when the information in question happens to be your name or Social Security number.
But don’t take my word for it; just call AT&T and ask them questions like, “How do you use my personal information? Who else have you disclosed this information to?” Let me know how they respond.
“Marcia Bates” is a name I’ve seen many times in my LIBR 202 course. Her paper on “berrypicking” techniques for online search interfaces is a particular favorite of mine in no small part because of the remarkable analogy she draws. But I imagine a at least a few of her fellow library science students got a little tired of hearing the name “Marcia” all the time.
For those of us who saw the Disney movie first, the novel “Something Wicked This Way Comes” by Ray Bradbury is something of a bait-and-switch in reverse–at least, if you are looking for a depiction of a librarian. The most immediate difference is that in the movie, the adult protagonist, Charles Halloway is a librarian; in Bradbury’s novel, he is the library’s janitor! I suppose the powers-that-be at Disney decided that janitors can’t be heros? Have they not seen The Toxic Avenger?
Earlier this year, Facebook raised the ire of users and privacy rights groups when the social networking company announced updates to its privacy policy, which some interpreted as a declaration of ownership over the media and information uploaded by Facebook users. While the Facebook debacle may be old news, the larger issue of ownership over personal media and information has yet to be addressed in a meaningful way. Thus, the question remains: when we participate as “users” in a cybernated society, whether as Facebook fanatics or AT&T customers, are we (or should we be) allowing these organizations to claim ownership over the information and media we store in their systems? Do all our base belong to them?
Google has stumbled a step in its path towards world domination after a court in France ruled that the search engine company is breaking French law with its Google Books project, handing down a daily fine equivalent to $15,000 until the data in question is completely removed.
