Several years ago, Microsoft was pounded -- correctly -- for the "Smart Tags" feature it was slipping onto people's PCs. This essentially created hyperlinks where none had existed before, and sent people clicking on those links to Microsoft-chosen content. It was insidious, and a number of folks, with Walt Mossberg in the lead, denounced the move so loudly that the company was basically forced to back away. (Of course, Microsoft being Microsoft, the company slipped it back into Office in the 2003 version, one more reason I didn't "upgrade" on my Windows PC.)
Now Google, using its own growing clout, is doing something similar with its latest "Google Toolbar" for Internet Explorer on PCs, says Search Engine Watch. No, Google doesn't control the operating system, and if I understand this correctly the feature isn't turned on by default (please correct me if this is not the case). Moreover, it only works with certain kinds of terms, and you have to explictly download the toolbar in the first place. And, of course, no one has to use this -- one more reason to choose Firefox as your browser, anyway.
All of those caveats aside, it's still a bad idea, and an unfortunate move by a company that is looking to continue its hypergrowth. With its enormous market share in search, Google is starting to act in ways that are reminiscent of our favorite monopolist. As Dave Winer observes, this is near enough to changing Web content as to be worrisome.
The most important thing here is the precedent. This is the thin end of the wedge.
The only person that should ever have control of the content of a web page is the author. That needs to be sacrosanct. If you take that control away from the author, then they will just as likely not bother. I personally will not spend my time writing content for other people to make money from by hijacking it in manners such as this. End result? Even less quality content on the Internet.
Today, it's just adding links to books. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where this is heading. Of course they are not going to "wade in" with the full extent of their intentions, but of course the end result will be wholesale alteration of other people's web sites to make profits for advertisers of their choice - or the highest bidder. Any way you slice it, this can only be copyright infringement and theft - not to mention being ethically and morally reprehensible.
Arguments such as "well, it's OK because you have to actually enable it etc..." don't hold water because - I say again - it's the thin end of the wedge. After the noise has settled from the initial infringement, it's but a little step to make it automatically enabled. It's but a little step to increase the links from addresses and books to CDs, computer software etc... Before you know it, the original author will be hard pressed to recognise his/her own work.
Like most authors, I wouldn't care less if you alter the content of my web site for your own viewing. Where all authors draw the line is when a THIRD PARTY alters content before it is re-published to the audience. That is plainly what is happening here. In this case, google is the third party. YOU are not deciding on the content displayed to you, GOOGLE is deciding and (by the way) the original author plainly isn't. The original author already decided on the content, but those decisions are being summarily dismissed.
No, this needs to be stopped now while the first step is being taken. That first step is the denial of the fundamental right of the author to control the content of their own copy.
Posted by: Alan Hearnshaw | April 12, 2005 at 10:40 AM
Oi, muito bacana seu blog!! Tenho uma dica para você: quando for viajar e quiser ficar num hotel pelo Brasil, visite este
site http://www.hoteisbaratos.com.br/ tem hotéis por todo o Brasil, inclusive nas nossas praias, é bem legal, você vai gostar!
Posted by: Lauro | June 22, 2005 at 12:35 PM