In a legal win for Google, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by a writer who claimed the search giant infringed on his copyright by archiving a Usenet posting of his and providing excerpts from his Web site in search results.
Although a minor victory for the company, which faces numerous suits charging that its services trample the rights of authors.
The lawsuit was filed by Gordon Roy Parker, also known as Ray Gordon, who publishes his writings under the business name of Snodgrass Publishing Group. Parker, of Philadelphia, also posted a chapter of one of his e-books on the Usenet bulletin board network, a collection of thousands of discussion forums called newsgroups.
Parker, 39, an online publisher of sexual seduction guides with titles like "Why Hotties Choose Losers," is a former paralegal who was acting on his own behalf in suing Google. His site also offers racetrack betting and chess-playing tips.
In a ruling issued March 10, and being disclosed recently, Judge R. Barclay Surrick of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania rejected 11 allegations contained in a civil complaint by Parker of Philadelphia.
The eleven claims against Google had included accusations of copyright and trademark infringement, invasion of privacy, negligence, racketeering, abuse of legal process and civil conspiracy, according to the court documents.
In his 2004 lawsuit against Google, Parker alleged that the search giant violated copyright law by automatically archiving a copy of his posting on Usenet and by providing excerpts from his Web site in search results.
Judge Surrick’s ruling found that Google enjoys projection under an exemption to the Communications Decency Act for online service providers acting as an automatic re-distributor of published material.
Parker’s original 72-page complaint had argued that Google was responsible for anonymous Web postings attacking him in Usenet newsgroups that Google archives on its computers and via the newsgroup and general Web search systems it offers.
Judge Surrick said Google’s activities, akin to those of an Internet Service Provider, do not constitute infringement.
The ruling cited a January decision in the Field v. Google case in federal court in Nevada that concluded that cached versions of Web pages Google stores and offers as a part of many search results do not infringe copyright.
When an ISP automatically and temporarily stores data without human intervention so that the system can operate and transmit data to its users, the necessary element of volition is missing, the judge said.
The judge in that case affirmed Google’s "fair use" right to cache, or stores a copy in its database for redistribution.
The ruling comes after a decision last month in which a federal judge in Los Angeles said that portions of Google’s image search feature, which displays thumbnail versions of images found on adult photo site Perfect 10 and others, likely violate U.S. copyright law.
Usenet newsgroups are a wide-ranging, uncensored forum for online group discussions that date back 25 years and cover an endless range of topics from music to religion to obscure topics like beekeeping and alternative sexual practices.
The dismissal of Parker’s case, reported recently by CNET News.com, follows a ruling in a Nevada federal court in January in favor of Google in a copyright lawsuit filed by a lawyer who publishes poems on his Web site.
In his lawsuit, Parker also claimed Google was liable for defamation because the search company archived allegedly defamatory messages posted by Usenet users and that Google was invading his privacy by creating an "unauthorized biography" of him, the court said. However, the court said Google is immune because it either archived or provided access to content that was created by a third party.
Parker said he will appeal the decision. "The court is confused about what cache means," he said in a telephone interview. "Google really is a third-party republication."
"Google takes my content, uses it to bolster its search engine and attracts traffic to which they pitch advertising from my competitors," Parker complained.
"If someone wants to ruin your reputation, they can use Google to do it," Parker said of attacks on his reputation that surface when Web users search the Usenet archive for links to him. "Libel law as we know it in print publications does not exist on the Internet. It is just not being applied," he said.
The Parker decision is one of several recent rulings finding that Google’s services are consistent with principles of copyright law. Indeed, Judge Surrick relied in part on Judge Jones’ decision in Field v. Google.
Michael Kwun, Google’s litigation counsel, said in a statement released by the company. "We are very pleased with this decision," he said, noting that the judge in Pennsylvania had relied in part on the earlier Nevada case.
The search engine also faces copyright lawsuits filed last year by authors and publishers groups over its controversial Library Project book-scanning plans, and a lawsuit filed by Agence France-Presse and threat of litigation from the World Association of Newspapers for aggregating headlines and photos without permission or compensation.
In a legal blow to Google earlier this week, a federal judge in San Jose, Calif., said he would grant federal prosecutors at least part of their request for excerpts from Google’s index of Web sites. Google is challenging a subpoena from the Department of Justice for a random sampling of Internet addresses and search queries that the DOJ says it needs to help defend a measure designed to hold Web sites liable if minors can access pornography on them.