<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google lies &#8211; but you knew that already, right?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://booktwo.org/notebook/google-lies/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://booktwo.org/notebook/google-lies/</link>
	<description>The future of Literature</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 03:29:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: James Bridle</title>
		<link>http://booktwo.org/notebook/google-lies/comment-page-1/#comment-64115</link>
		<dc:creator>James Bridle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 18:46:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://booktwo.org/?p=788#comment-64115</guid>
		<description>Alain, I agree in principle, but I&#039;m afraid that &quot;seeing lies&quot; is pretty much unavoidable. It doesn&#039;t surprise or horrify or distress me, but telling people with a straight face that something has nothing to do with ebooks, then doing ebooks within two years, is definitely lying. Google is too big and clever to pretend they never thought about this, and they deliberately attempted to mislead publishers. However, if publishers were mislead, I&#039;m happy to agree that it was pretty much their fault, and not Google&#039;s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alain, I agree in principle, but I&#8217;m afraid that &#8220;seeing lies&#8221; is pretty much unavoidable. It doesn&#8217;t surprise or horrify or distress me, but telling people with a straight face that something has nothing to do with ebooks, then doing ebooks within two years, is definitely lying. Google is too big and clever to pretend they never thought about this, and they deliberately attempted to mislead publishers. However, if publishers were mislead, I&#8217;m happy to agree that it was pretty much their fault, and not Google&#8217;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alain Pierrot</title>
		<link>http://booktwo.org/notebook/google-lies/comment-page-1/#comment-61066</link>
		<dc:creator>Alain Pierrot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 07:36:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://booktwo.org/?p=788#comment-61066</guid>
		<description>No real need to see purposeful deceit or lies: any company would leverage their terms of use at some stage, given the opportunity. Doing otherwise would be unprofessional, a kind of betrayal of shareholders.  

&quot;Ne eos inducatis in temptationem&quot; ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No real need to see purposeful deceit or lies: any company would leverage their terms of use at some stage, given the opportunity. Doing otherwise would be unprofessional, a kind of betrayal of shareholders.  </p>
<p>&#8220;Ne eos inducatis in temptationem&#8221; ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
