Copyright laws apparently do not apply to google. They scrape the world but do not allow you to scrape them. The funny thing is that if a website would do what google does here they'd be penalized.
The google ideal is that the world provides content which it can then mete out at its discretion. For another nice example of google re-packaging content see google images.
However, google is not necessarily giving the right attribution, according to SA's attribution pages. They're attributing back to stack overflow, but not the person who gave the answer, they're missing links to the users who contributed to the answer, and the fact that it's a stack overflow answer is, frankly, not obvious.
I'm sure Google's lawyers could argue the ambiguity well in court, but to my eyes, they're not doing the right thing here.
7 comments
[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 12.6 ms ] threadThe google ideal is that the world provides content which it can then mete out at its discretion. For another nice example of google re-packaging content see google images.
I'm sure Google's lawyers could argue the ambiguity well in court, but to my eyes, they're not doing the right thing here.
I'd be interesting in where else this sort of thing comes up - it's very Duck Duck Go.
New York skyscrapers: https://www.google.com/search?q=new+york+skyscrapers
Best movies of 2013: https://www.google.com/search?q=best+movies+of+2013
You can also just search for 'weather' and it shows you your local weather. Or you can search for the weather in a specific city: https://www.google.com/search?q=weather+sevilla
Flight status: https://www.google.com/search?q=LH+327
Calculations: https://www.google.com/search?q=2*pi*10%5E2
And more: https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/3284611?hl=en
Some of these results are based on what they call 'Knowledge Graph': http://www.google.com/insidesearch/features/search/knowledge... which pulls in data from Freebase, Wikipedia and some other sources.