[News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames! - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames! - Linux ; -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Microsoft Burns Down Book Search ,----[ Quote ] | Citing poor demand, Microsoft will back away from scanning and indexing books | and academic works for Live Search `---- http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/20...wn-book-search Another failure. This must ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: [News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames!

  1. [News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames!

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Microsoft Burns Down Book Search

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Citing poor demand, Microsoft will back away from scanning and indexing books
    | and academic works for Live Search
    `----

    http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/20...wn-book-search

    Another failure. This must have wasted a fortune. More resentment for Google.

    And this is the company that wants to store medical data. Will they close that
    service down "citing poor demand" (read: not enough cash)? Didn't they already
    screw customers in this way with DRM? See below.


    Recent:

    EFF: Microsoft betrayed MSN Music customers

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | The Electronic Frontier Foundation says that Microsoft has "betrayed" MSN
    | Music customers and wants the company to make things right by issuing an
    | apology, refunds, and eliminate digital rights management technology from the
    | Zune music player. *
    `----

    http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-993...=2547-1_3-0-20


    MSN Music Debacle Highlights EULA Dangers

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | MSN Music’s EULA is a case in point. When active, MSN Music's webpage touted
    | that customers could “choose their device and know its going to work”.
    |
    | But when customers went to purchase songs, they were shown legalese that
    | stated the download service and the content provided were sold without
    | warrantee. In other words, Microsoft doesn't promise you that the service or
    | the music will work, or that you will always have access to music you bought.
    | The flashy advertising promised your music, your way, but the fine print
    | said, our way or the highway.
    `----

    http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/05...s-eula-dangers


    When DRM detonates your music collection

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | It is all down to the digital rights management (DRM) software that Microsoft
    | has embedded in all its music downloads to combat illegal file-sharing. For
    | DRM to work it needs a central computer to keep a live record of who has
    | registered which songs to which computers. The problem is that the main
    | server is now being turned off as the company wants to sell downloads with a
    | new type of DRM. How odd that the old system was marketed as PlaysForSure.
    `----

    http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/...cle3898784.ece
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFIN4ZXU4xAY3RXLo4RAhSDAJ0eEv2VZHS12nyVItm9AV CGItDrgACcC+BN
    tH1GXA1usEVqrpGx47+yDjA=
    =UmFy
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  2. Re: [News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames!

    Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:

    > Microsoft Burns Down Book Search
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | Citing poor demand, Microsoft will back away from scanning and
    > | indexing books | and academic works for Live Search
    > `----
    >
    > http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/20...wn-book-search


    What? There's "poor demand" for DRM encumbered books? Amazing.

    > Another failure. This must have wasted a fortune. More resentment for
    > Google.


    They should leave it to the pros like Internet Archive and Gutenberg,
    who are motived by academic principles and altruism, rather than greed.

    > And this is the company that wants to store medical data.


    Would you trust your /life/ to a company that sells backup software that
    corrupts files, then takes a /year/ to correct the problem.

    Would you trust your life to a company that claims /ownership/ of /your/
    data, using licenses and DRM?

    Your life in their hands.

    Frightening.

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
    | ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
    01:15:27 up 155 days, 21:51, 6 users, load average: 0.13, 0.15, 0.11

  3. Re: [News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames!

    In article , Homer
    wrote:
    > Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
    >
    > > Microsoft Burns Down Book Search
    > >
    > > ,----[ Quote ]
    > > | Citing poor demand, Microsoft will back away from scanning and
    > > | indexing books | and academic works for Live Search
    > > `----
    > >
    > > http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/20...own-book-searc
    > > h

    >
    > What? There's "poor demand" for DRM encumbered books? Amazing.


    Huh? There's no DRM involved in this.

    --
    --Tim Smith

  4. Re: [News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames!

    Tim Smith wrote:

    > Huh? *There's no DRM involved in this.


    Nope. Just Microsoft being out-Googled again. Microsoft got out of the
    blocks way too late and Google is too big to be bullied, bought out or
    flanked. Microsoft, if they are to compete on the Internet, will actually
    have to out *innovate* Google.

    I won't be holding my breath.

    --
    RonB
    "There's a story there...somewhere"

  5. Re: [News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames!

    RonB wrote:
    > Tim Smith wrote:
    >
    >> Huh? There's no DRM involved in this.

    >
    > Nope. Just Microsoft being out-Googled again. Microsoft got out of the
    > blocks way too late and Google is too big to be bullied, bought out or
    > flanked. Microsoft, if they are to compete on the Internet, will
    > actually have to out *innovate* Google.
    >
    > I won't be holding my breath.


    There you go again, WRonG, making a Linux advocacy post in a Linux advocacy
    group.




  6. Re: [News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames!

    On Sat, 24 May 2008 18:06:21 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:

    > In article , Homer
    > wrote:
    >> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
    >>
    >>> Microsoft Burns Down Book Search
    >>>
    >>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>> | Citing poor demand, Microsoft will back away from scanning and
    >>> | indexing books | and academic works for Live Search
    >>> `----
    >>>
    >>> http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/20...own-book-searc
    >>> h

    >>
    >> What? There's "poor demand" for DRM encumbered books? Amazing.

    >
    > Huh? There's no DRM involved in this.


    Homer is not one of the sharper tools in the drawer.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  7. Re: [News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames!

    Moshe Goldfarb (flatfish) in real life Gary Stewart

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  8. Re: [News] [Rival] Microsoft Book Search Goes Down in Flames!

    Verily I say unto thee, that RonB spake thusly:
    > Tim Smith wrote:


    >> Huh? There's no DRM involved in this.


    Well that must be a first for the Vole.

    Doing this also removes Microsoft from the line of fire regarding the
    copyrights of published works. By limiting their spidering to content
    posted by publishers and libraries, the onus of determining proper
    ownership and rights falls to those who create such repositories.
    So does this mean that so far they /haven't/ been enforcing publisher's
    "rights" with DRM? Tsk, tsk ... bad Microsoft. And here they are,
    champions of Intellectual Monopoly, and all.

    > Nope. Just Microsoft being out-Googled again.


    I see. I saw the word "demand" and just assumed that Microsoft was
    selling something. If that "something" is media content, then I further
    assumed they would "protect" it with DRM. If they're /not/ selling
    something, then why would they allude to there being "no demand" for it?
    "No demand" from whom? Who are these "customers" who are "not demanding"
    this content? One does not typically refer to an act of altruism in
    terms of "demand" ... or perhaps the Vole doesn't "get" that.

    Of course we all know the /real/ motive behind this failed venture. It
    was simply a case of spite - more ammunition to "fscking kill Google".
    It failed, so now it's being discarded like a dud bullet. /That's/ not
    what altruism is about either.

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
    | ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
    03:16:51 up 155 days, 23:52, 6 users, load average: 0.02, 0.11, 0.29

+ Reply to Thread