Re: Google Caching For Fun And Profit

[Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu]

On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 18:24:50 GMT, cyber flash said:

> Is Google now liable because it's hosting illegal files on their servers.

At least in the US, this qualifies for the various "Safe Harbor" exemptions in
17 USC 512, where they're not liable as long as they respond to takedown
notices. If you've ever seen a Google search return "one or more entries have
been removed due to DMCA requests, go visit chillingeffects.org", that's a
Google response to a takedown notice.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000512----000-.html

You're interested in 17 USC 512 (b) regarding cached information and
17 USC 512 (d) regarding "information location tools"

Note that it's still an undecided question whether merely having a link to
infringing materials is itself infringing - there's a very messy area having to
do with "facilitating" infringement.  You stick a "Hey warez puppez, check this
out" comment on it, you're probably facilitating.  You keep a whole list of
links to nothing but infringing stuff, you're likely facilitating.  You have a
lot of links to stuff that you comment on, and some are infringing but most
aren't, that's probably not facilitating.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/