Hollywood wants $15 million from Pirate Bay
If you google my name, you will get several pages full of links to forum, mailing list, and blog posts I have made. These posts are materials I have written, and therefore can claim copyright to. There may be messages from the times I've been in Europe, so I also claim droit d'auteur. I am sure there will be many more. They represent the sum of much intellectual thought I have given in the technical world, and combined can probably represent a small sum of valuable so called intellectual property.
The maintainers of these message boards and mailing lists have a given right to publish this information freely, as my contribution to the open source world. My blog is freely published. But I think that every time Google links to a post, they are required to pay me 1 cent USD for each click through. Otherwise Google is illegally providing information through a medium I do not want.
If everyone started making this claim on Google, they would go bankrupt, and not be able to afford to pay for the pigeons that are so good at searching for sites.
Reductio ad absurdum. QED.
Supposing I were to say something on my blog that is a trade secret. Do we punish Google for linking to it? I mean Google has alot of money, why hasn't someone at least tried to pull this in court? Clearly there is something fallacious in the argument of penalizing a search engine for content they do not host.
Perhaps if I split a trade secret into three parts. Each part I give to a different entity to publish and host. Because my blog links to all three, searching Google yields all three sights clustered together. The trade secret is suddenly revealed. Do you penalized Google, or perhaps each site an equal portion for the third they released? While this hasn't happened, the logic behind punishing Google remains just as absurd as the previous scenario.
Reductio ad absurdum (I feel like I'm in a Harry Potter movie saying Reductio so much....).