That sucks. Ancestry.com is an amazing service from the consumer POV. You put your parents and grandparents names in, and 4 hours later you are still at your computer, and you've traced your family back to 1500s France; when 4 hours previously you didn't even know you were French.
I've been watching Rockford Files on Netflix. It was a "one hour" show back in the day, which translates to 48 minutes on Netflix. New shows seems to cram 20 minutes of commercials in to a "one hour" show.
And people think I'm being a cranky old guy when I explain why I'd rather own the music I listen to, instead of relying on a streaming service that may go away tomorrow, leaving with nothing to show for potentially years of $10 a month payments.
Re: Typical GOOG apology-- you don't get something for nothing
I predict 7-10 days before the Spanish news sites are screaming to turn Google News back on. It's very likely a large percentage of their inbound traffic just went away. It's kind of hard to sell ads on a website with no traffic.
Swift is making money every time that song streams on YouTube, right? If they have the technology to recognize that its her song but not the official video, what is so hard about adding all the mash-up plays to her account so she gets paid? Then everybody wins. The fans can use the music, and Taylor's $50 billion empire makes $85 more dollars on fan use of the song.
I've said here before, but there needs to be some penalty suffered by legislators that vote for blatantly unconstitutional bills. It will end up costing 6 or 7 figures worth of tax dollars defending this crap bill.
You are assuming that they don't want the attention. Would any of us be aware of this product without them "poking the beehive." It could be a moderately clever gamble that he short term gain in sales and publicity and long term gain on name recognition will be worth more than whatever they settle for when settle the lawsuit.