decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Righthaven - Were they right? | 394 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Chinese official backs Proview in Apple dispute
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 05:04 PM EDT
It's all very well some government official dropping an (in)discrete word to the press. Apple bashers could perhaps pause to reflect on the quality of justice in China if it can be leaned on so simply by the government. If Apple loses this case then somebody else will be facing fraud charges for selling a trademark they didn't own, and similar cases of "economic sabotage" have resulted in capital punishment. Meanwhile in other news one quarter of Apple's revenue now comes from the Chinese market. We might expect a less public word passed to the judiciary from the Ministry of Economic Development.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Google Drive: It's slick, integrated...and not exactly free
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 09:37 PM EDT
The Newspick points out that if you (easily) exceed the basic service limits, then Google Drive will cost you money. Another forum I read pointed out some hooks in the ToS which would have seekers of that other freedom frothing at the mouth. AFAICT the ToS for Google Drive seem to be subsumed with all Google "Services". Given Groklaw's quite proper consideration for legal advice, I advise intending users of Google Drive to ask their own Legal Advisor how to reconcile these two paragraphs:
Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps). Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services. Make sure you have the necessary rights to grant us this license for any content that you submit to our Services.
Google Terms of Service

I can't find if there are any modifications to those ToS specifically for Google Drive, because the service is "coming soon" in my part of the world.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Righthaven - Were they right?
Authored by: complex_number on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 11:43 PM EDT
[www.adajournal.com]

The article asks the question, have you found something on the internet that was stolen from you?

Well, yes I have. BUT there was little I could do about it.

I found a picture of a 'Giraffe Necked Weevil' on the internet. This particulat beast is a native of Madagascar and is an insect I like and have studied in its native habitat. I found one of my pictures of said weevil on a US Site. I sent a DMCA takedown but this was ignored and the image remained on the site for all to see. My recourse would have been to sue but I don't have the money to pay for a US Lawyer to do it for me. So I had to let it go because the US Courts seemingly do not recognise judgements made outside the USA. No surprise their then.

The image remained on the site for three years until the whole site disappeared.

I have sold a few photographs, but most of the time I let people use them if they ask and give a donation to a wildlife charity of my choosing. That way I don't have to declare the income to the taxman. But there are still people who feel that they have rights to my work without even acknowledgement.

I might take a different view if I was a professional photographer.

---
Ubuntu & 'apt-get' are not the answer to Life, The Universe & Everything which is of course, "42" or is it 1.618?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )