Lone voice of dissent (Score 1)

I can hardly believe the lemmings around here posting about Google doing this for altruistic purposes. Let me shake up you lemmings with a couple of facts:

• assuming the artists family does own the rights to the work and Google was infringing on those rights, the posters claims here that 'it was good for the artist' is complete crap. You don't get to use other people's works just because you feel it's in there best interests. There's laws about that kind of stuff, designed to protect people. Everyone here OK if I steal *cough* your code for my own business purposes, but suggest that doing so was in your best interests because 'it raises awareness of your wonderful coding capabilites?' If you're OK with that, there's the GPL. Otherwise, keep your hands off of other people's work.
• when did Google become a non-profit? You think Google was doing this in the best interests of the artist and not for their own profit motive? Did you know they took the word 'naive' out of the dictionary?
• Not the first time Google's trampled on other people's works. Remember when they decided to scan everyone's books in and make them available on their own website? what about the fact that they already republish your entire website on their website (they call it their 'cache'. Scrapers and robots call it 'how to get someone else's website content without being blocked by the content owner).