News Corp needles Google for not protecting copyright -- Is Google an "honest" broker?

Google just can't seem to get on the right side of copyright law -- or the law in general for that matter.

• Google's MySpace partner, News Corp clearly doesn't believe Google is doing enough to protect copyrights. 
• Peter Chernin, President of News Corp., in an interview with the Financial Times yesterday, chided Google that ""they could do a better job" at preventing illegally copied video from appearing on its YouTube site."
  • FT asks: "Do they have the technology to do it?"
  • Chernin: "It's pretty safe to say that they have the technology available, that if we [MySpace] have the technology available, a) it's publicly available, and b) I haven't yet heard a lot about Google being technologically constrained."

The point here is that Google clearly has the wherewithal to not violate copyright, but they are making a business decision that it is better or more profitable for Google to disrespect copyright law rather than to respect copyright law.

• This is the core problem with Google's business model for others.
  • Google gets paid by online advertising volume.
  • It gets paid the same if the video found is legal or illegal, just as it gets paid the same if a "click" is fraudulent or legitimate.
• Google claims that it respects the law, but its systematic ongoing behavior belies that.  

I asked the question in a previous post, :"Who is America's most notorious scofflaw?"

• "Can anybody name another American company that is a bigger more systematic scofflaw than Google? -- its a growing pattern."

In another of my posts: "Viacom sues Google for "clearly illegal business model" its a growing pattern."

Bottomline: Why do I harp on this issue?

• Online advertising is the only proven business model to monetize content on the Internet.
• As I have explained in detail at my www.googleopoly.net website, Google with the Double-Click acquisition is primed to further dominate online advertising.
• The problem gets much worse, because Google is positioning itself to become the world's de facto "information broker" and the evidence is overwhelming that Google is not in fact an "honest broker."