University:
Indiana University Bloomington
Course:
Financial and Managerial Accounting: Information for Decisions - John J. Wild
Academic year:

2024
Views:

65

Pages:

2
Author:

bratrochanter

The case Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. examines whether Google’s use of copyrighted images, particularly through thumbnail images and in-line linking, violates Perfect 10’s display and distribution rights under copyright law. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the following key issues: 1. Google’s Image Display and Distribution: o Thumbnail Images: Google created low-resolution thumbnail versions of Perfect 10’s copyrighted images, which were displayed in search results on Google’s own servers. The court found that storing and displaying these thumbnails constituted a prima facie case of copyright infringement, as Google directly displayed copies of the images. o In-Line Linking to Full-Size Images: Google’s search results included HTML links directing users to third-party sites hosting fullsize images. When users clicked on these thumbnails, Google’s code framed the images but did not host or distribute them directly. The court ruled that Google’s in-line linking did not infringe on Perfect 10’s display rights since Google did not store or serve the full-size images. 2. Server Test for Display Rights: o The court adopted the "server test," which holds that a display infringement occurs only if a party hosts and displays a copy of the image directly from its server. Thus, Google’s in-line linking, which did not involve serving the images from its own servers, did not infringe Perfect 10’s rights to display or distribute full-size images. 3. Distribution Right: o Perfect 10 argued that Google violated its distribution rights by facilitating access to full-size images. The court, however, held that Google did not directly distribute the images because it did not transfer copies to users; rather, it merely provided HTML code directing users to third-party websites where the images were stored. Consequently, there was no distribution infringement on Google’s part. 4. Fair Use Defense for Thumbnail Images: o Transformative Use: Google argued that using thumbnails served a new, transformative purpose by acting as an index tool, which differed from Perfect 10’s original purpose of selling full-size images. Citing a similar case (Kelly v. Arriba Soft), the court agreed that Google’s use of thumbnails as search results was transformative. o Commercial Nature and Public Benefit: Although Google’s service was commercial, the court noted that the search engine served a public benefit by improving access to information, aligning with the fair use doctrine’s goals. o Effect on Market: The court found limited market impact, concluding that Google’s thumbnails did not substitute for Perfect 10’s full-size images or harm its market for cell phone downloads. Thus, the commercial nature of Google’s thumbnails did not outweigh the transformative and public-serving aspects of its search engine. In conclusion, the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Google’s fair use defense for displaying thumbnail images, noting their transformative use as search tools. The court affirmed that Google’s in-line linking did not infringe Perfect 10’s display or distribution rights, setting an important precedent for the limits of copyright infringement in online search and linking contexts.