Copyright piracy, good or evil?

On January 9, 2010, four days before it threatened to leave the Chinese market, Google issued a response to the CWA's public ultimatum, apologizing to the Chinese writers. But the apology was not seen as positive by the writers, since Google did not admit any mistakes regarding its infringement of copyrights or even take any responsibility.

Although Google expressed a hope of trying to "reach a satisfactory solution to the disputes with Chinese writers through further negotiations," the writers believed the apology "lacked sincerity" and was only a tactic concession to avoid more lawsuits.

With regards to the "dispute" between Chinese writers and Google, I believe copyright infringement is undoubtedly not right. But interestingly, one of my friends told me that he thinks Google did "a great job" by offering free reading to netizens by scanning books.

How come that such opinions emerged? If you think more about it, it's not hard to figure it out. Like most people who have bought cheap discs believing that pirated DVD sellers having done "a great job," different interests have led to different views about what is good and what is evil.

But for western countries who have been holding up high their banners of protecting intellectual property rights, I don't think they would sit relaxed and look unconcerned over such behaviors of copyright infringement. If they know that Google apologized for its "evilness" just four days ago and felt uneasy about whether it would face a mass of copyright piracy lawsuits from Chinese writers, would they continue to take it for granted that Google is a model of "doing no evil"?

Maybe this is the reason why the western media did not mention a word to their own readers and audience about Google's apology and its lawsuit troubles in China.