Getty Images sues Microsoft for 'massive' infringement over image search tool

[codeman]

I thought this news item I found on ZDNET might be of interest to the ELI forum members.

http://www.zdnet.com/getty-images-sues-microsoft-for-massive-infringement-over-image-search-tool-7000033327/

[Matthew Chan]

Yes, I think this is of interest to our audience. Thank you for that!

That article links and refers back to the originating Reuters article.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/04/us-getty-images-microsoft-lawsuit-idUSKBN0GZ2B720140904?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologyNews

[stinger]

So, it looks like, if Getty loses this suit, their business is done, finit, kaput.

But how will digital image content providers earn a living?

[lucia]

I was curious to learn what the 'widget' does.  I had to google around. Most pages just told me Getty was suing, and Getty thought it was copyright infringement but didn't describe precisely what the widget does; they just say it lest you "embed". Bing's own help page appear to be dead (possibly because of the suit?) But how things are embedded might matter in court.  So, I hunted a bit.

I found this page which shows an embedded image:

http://thrivesearch.com/bings-image-search-widget-lets-embed-image-results-web-site/
On that page, the author used the widget to "embed" search results.  In terms of nuts and bolts, it appears the 'widget' helps the author of a web page embed html/javascript  that looks sort of like this:


<div class="bingwidget" data-type="images" data-query="SEO marketing" data-layout="collage" data-count="" data-height="270px" data-width="480px" data-color="595959" data-style="padding:10px 10px 1px 10px;background:%%K%%;border:1px solid ccc;" data-market="en-us" data-safesearch="moderate" data-version="0.9" data-language="en-US"></div>
<p><script src="//www.bing.com/widget/bootstrap.js" async=""></script>
(I added the blue to highlight some terms.)

For the uninitiated "//www.bing.com/widget/bootstrap.js" points to a script (i.e. sort of computer program) which is hosted on bing.com.  Anyone who wishes too and load www.bing.com/widget/bootstrap.js and see the nearly unreadable javascript code. (Line breaks don't display, blah, blah.)  I know some javascript and might be able to dive into it-- but I"m not going to. I'll just say that it appears that what the above code does is load the first 6 results of a search results someone would get if they went to bing image search and entered "seo marketing" (don't add the "").  (Note the blue above matches some words in the 'widget' code.)

You can see what happens if you do the bing search by clicking this:

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=seo%20marketing

Robert's javascript-foo is probably better than mine, but my guess is the javascript creates a frame of some sort, performs the search and returns the top 6 results, bundles those images into html and then permits page that hosts the 'widget' code (here http://thrivesearch.com/bings-image-search-widget-lets-embed-image-results-web-site/) to display the images.

As for how things are embedded:  I can't tell whether the images displayed at http://thrivesearch.com/bings-image-search-widget-lets-embed-image-results-web-site/ are hotlinked from the original sites that hosts them or from images copied by and then hosted by Bing.  I suspect if the images are hotlinked from the original sites, Getty can't win because in that case, all the Bing's javascript does is make it easier for "A" to hotlink "B"s images, which is already not copying and not displaying under copyright statutes (or at least under Amazon v. Perfect 10).  And Bing wouldn't be displaying or hotlinking at "A"s site. So Bing helping  A 'not copy' and 'not display' can't be a copyright violation on Bing's part. (Mind you: I am not a lawyer. So... who knows? Still, seems to me that Bing would have been wiser to do it this way-- which btw I think would be technologically feasible.  Which means someone will soon consult their attorneys, try to figure out what they think of this legal argument and do it. )

On the other hand "A" is displaying images hosted at Bing.... dunno.  Bing would at least be copying, hosting and displaying, so I guess it would depends on how the courts see "fair use".  In the case of the widget, the purpose of Bing's display may no longer be seen as "search" itself, but something else. So... who knows? 

 (As for which is done: I think someone could dig through the javascript to figure that out whether images at the sites containing the widget are hotlinked from Bing or the original sites. But I haven't figure it out.)

[Greg Troy (KeepFighting)]

Thanks as always for the information Lucia!

[JLorimer]

The JavaScript has been minified, likely to increase page speed. If you feel at all inclined to look at the JavaScript, you can visit http://www.bing.com/widget/bootstrap.js and copy all that shows on the page. Then paste it in the big text box at http://jsbeautifier.org/ and hit the "Beautify JavaScript or HTML" button. This will make the code readable in a very similar way to how you would edit it with your editor of choice.

It looks like Bing is hosting the thumbnails at least.



I inspected the bottom middle image that has the blue border. You can see in the HTML below it, where it is also highlighted in blue, that the source (src) points to http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=HN.608017367656300980&w=186&h=116&c=7&rs=1&pid=ImgWidget

I don't know if it is at all significant, but the title seems to point back to the origin where the image was found (http://drinknectar.com/2010/12/09/rankings-linkbacks-and-google-seo/seo-search-engine-marketing/).

If you click any of the thumbs, it takes you to a search result.

This is probably irrelevant to the case, but you can modify the image by playing with some of the parameters in the source link. For example, you can set the height (h) from 186 to 1024 and the width (w) from 116 to 639. This doesn't seem to increase the quality, but it will give you a larger image. I suppose that someone who was really motivated could use the bing results to in turn load single images on his/her site.

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=HN.608017367656300980&w=1024&h=639&c=7&rs=1&pid=ImgWidget

[lucia]

I suppose that someone who was really motivated could use the bing results to in turn load single images on his/her site.

If someone is really motivated to load a single image, they can do that without using the widget.  They just visit bing, pick an image, find the uri and insert <img src='uri of image'> and voila!   Fiddling with the bing widget doesn't seem to make this any easier.

[Joel Rothman]

Can someone please post a link to the complaint?

[Matthew Chan]

Ask and you shall receive courtesy of PACER...

Getty Images v. Microsoft Complaint:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/239660270/Getty-Images-v-Microsoft-Lawsuit-Complaint

Can someone please post a link to the complaint?