Julie Bosman, New York times; Judge Sets Schedule in Case Over Google’s Digital Library:
"Google’s plan to build a huge digital library remained stalled on Thursday when a federal judge set a proposed schedule for a lawsuit against the giant search company that could take the case to trial next year."
Showing posts with label Authors Guild. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Authors Guild. Show all posts
Friday, September 16, 2011
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
In Authors' Suit Against Libraries, an Attempt to Wrest Back Some Control Over Digitized Works; Chronicle of Higher Education, 9/14/11
Jennifer Howard, Chronicle of Higher Education; In Authors' Suit Against Libraries, an Attempt to Wrest Back Some Control Over Digitized Works:
"The copyright-infringement lawsuit brought on Monday by the Authors Guild and others against the HathiTrust digital repository, the University of Michigan, and four other universities could have a major impact on research libraries and the fate of millions of book scans created by recent mass-digitizing efforts. The plaintiffs seek to take control of those files out of the hands of libraries until Congress establishes guidelines for the use of digital libraries and orphan works—those that are subject to copyright but whose rights holders can't be identified or located.
But Paul Courant, dean of libraries at Michigan, said the libraries and the trust are in the right and will go on with their work."
"The copyright-infringement lawsuit brought on Monday by the Authors Guild and others against the HathiTrust digital repository, the University of Michigan, and four other universities could have a major impact on research libraries and the fate of millions of book scans created by recent mass-digitizing efforts. The plaintiffs seek to take control of those files out of the hands of libraries until Congress establishes guidelines for the use of digital libraries and orphan works—those that are subject to copyright but whose rights holders can't be identified or located.
But Paul Courant, dean of libraries at Michigan, said the libraries and the trust are in the right and will go on with their work."
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Authors Guild Sues HathiTrust and 5 Universities Over Digitized Books; Chronicle of Higher Education, 9/12/11
Chronicle of Higher Education; Authors Guild Sues HathiTrust and 5 Universities Over Digitized Books:
"The Authors Guild, the Australian Society of Authors, a Canadian writers’ union, and eight individual authors are suing HathiTrust and five universities for copyright infringement, the guild announced on Monday afternoon."
"The Authors Guild, the Australian Society of Authors, a Canadian writers’ union, and eight individual authors are suing HathiTrust and five universities for copyright infringement, the guild announced on Monday afternoon."
Monday, July 25, 2011
Judge Urges Settlement In Google Books Case; Wall Street Journal, 7/20/11
Chad Bray, Wall Street Journal; Judge Urges Settlement In Google Books Case:
"A federal judge urged Google Inc. and groups representing publishers and authors to reach a revised settlement over a proposed digital library of books before the next court hearing in September, saying he would set a schedule for the case to proceed to trial if the parties aren't close to a settlement by then."
"A federal judge urged Google Inc. and groups representing publishers and authors to reach a revised settlement over a proposed digital library of books before the next court hearing in September, saying he would set a schedule for the case to proceed to trial if the parties aren't close to a settlement by then."
Thursday, June 2, 2011
No Progress on Google Book Settlement Talks;Tone Changing? ; Publishers Weekly, 6/1/11
Albanese, A., Publishers Weekly; No Progress on Google Book Settlement Talks; Tone Changing? :
"The parties have made no progress on the underlying copyright dispute behind the lawsuits: whether Google’s scanning and limited display of library books is fair use, or infringement."
"The parties have made no progress on the underlying copyright dispute behind the lawsuits: whether Google’s scanning and limited display of library books is fair use, or infringement."
Friday, December 25, 2009
Le Guin accuses Authors Guild of 'deal with the devil'; Guardian, 12/25/09
Alison Flood, Guardian; Le Guin accuses Authors Guild of 'deal with the devil':
Ursula K Le Guin has resigned from the writers' organisation in protest at settlement with Google over digitisation
"Ursula K Le Guin has accused the Authors Guild of selling authors "down the river" in the Google settlement and has resigned from the US writers' body in protest after almost 40 years' membership.
In a strongly-worded letter of resignation the award-winning science fiction and fantasy author said the Guild's decision to support Google in its plans to digitise millions of books meant she could no longer countenance being a member."
You decided to deal with the devil, as it were, and have presented your arguments for doing so. I wish I could accept them. I can't," Le Guin wrote. "There are principles involved, above all the whole concept of copyright; and these you have seen fit to abandon to a corporation, on their terms, without a struggle.
"The Oregon-based writer has been a member of the Authors Guild since 1972. She said she was retaining membership in the National Writers Union and the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, both of which opposed the Google books settlement. "They don't have your clout, but their judgment, I think, is sounder, and their courage greater," she wrote.
Best known for her children's fantasy series the Earthsea quartet, and for the science fiction title The Left Hand of Darkness, Le Guin is the author of 21 novels, 11 volumes of short stories, three collections of essays, 12 books for children, six volumes of poetry and four of translation, and the recipient of literary awards including the Hugo, Nebula and National Book award. Her most recent publications include the poetry collection Incredible Good Fortune and the novel Lavinia, set in the world of Virgil's Aeneid and narrated by the wife-to-be of Aeneas.
The Authors Guild said in a statement that it regretted Le Guin's resignation and that "in many respects" it agreed with her position. "We hold the principles of copyright to be fundamental – they are bedrock principles for the Authors Guild and the economics of authorship. That's why we sued Google in the first place," it said. "It would therefore have been deeply satisfying, on many levels, to litigate our case to the end and win, enjoining Google from scanning books and forcing it to destroy the scans it had made. It also would have been irresponsible, once a path to a satisfactory settlement became available."
Offering to discuss the deal with Le Guin "at any time", the writers' body pointed out that if it had lost its case against Google, anyone, not just the search engine, could have digitised copyright-protected books and made them available online, prompting the "uncontrolled scanning of books" and "incalculable" damage to copyright protection. "The lessons of recent history are clear: when digital and online technologies meet traditional media, traditional media generally wind up gutted. Constructive engagement – in this case turning Google's infringement to our advantage - is sometimes the only realistic solution," it said.
In September, a group of almost 50 authors including Judy Blume, Elmore Leonard, Garrison Keillor, Barbara Taylor Bradford and Peter Straub all announced their public support of the Google books settlement."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/dec/24/le-guin-authors-guild-deal
Ursula K Le Guin has resigned from the writers' organisation in protest at settlement with Google over digitisation
"Ursula K Le Guin has accused the Authors Guild of selling authors "down the river" in the Google settlement and has resigned from the US writers' body in protest after almost 40 years' membership.
In a strongly-worded letter of resignation the award-winning science fiction and fantasy author said the Guild's decision to support Google in its plans to digitise millions of books meant she could no longer countenance being a member."
You decided to deal with the devil, as it were, and have presented your arguments for doing so. I wish I could accept them. I can't," Le Guin wrote. "There are principles involved, above all the whole concept of copyright; and these you have seen fit to abandon to a corporation, on their terms, without a struggle.
"The Oregon-based writer has been a member of the Authors Guild since 1972. She said she was retaining membership in the National Writers Union and the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, both of which opposed the Google books settlement. "They don't have your clout, but their judgment, I think, is sounder, and their courage greater," she wrote.
Best known for her children's fantasy series the Earthsea quartet, and for the science fiction title The Left Hand of Darkness, Le Guin is the author of 21 novels, 11 volumes of short stories, three collections of essays, 12 books for children, six volumes of poetry and four of translation, and the recipient of literary awards including the Hugo, Nebula and National Book award. Her most recent publications include the poetry collection Incredible Good Fortune and the novel Lavinia, set in the world of Virgil's Aeneid and narrated by the wife-to-be of Aeneas.
The Authors Guild said in a statement that it regretted Le Guin's resignation and that "in many respects" it agreed with her position. "We hold the principles of copyright to be fundamental – they are bedrock principles for the Authors Guild and the economics of authorship. That's why we sued Google in the first place," it said. "It would therefore have been deeply satisfying, on many levels, to litigate our case to the end and win, enjoining Google from scanning books and forcing it to destroy the scans it had made. It also would have been irresponsible, once a path to a satisfactory settlement became available."
Offering to discuss the deal with Le Guin "at any time", the writers' body pointed out that if it had lost its case against Google, anyone, not just the search engine, could have digitised copyright-protected books and made them available online, prompting the "uncontrolled scanning of books" and "incalculable" damage to copyright protection. "The lessons of recent history are clear: when digital and online technologies meet traditional media, traditional media generally wind up gutted. Constructive engagement – in this case turning Google's infringement to our advantage - is sometimes the only realistic solution," it said.
In September, a group of almost 50 authors including Judy Blume, Elmore Leonard, Garrison Keillor, Barbara Taylor Bradford and Peter Straub all announced their public support of the Google books settlement."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/dec/24/le-guin-authors-guild-deal
Monday, November 9, 2009
Google, Plaintiffs Blow Book Search Settlement Deadline; PC World, 11/09/09
Juan Carlos Perez, PC World; Google, Plaintiffs Blow Book Search Settlement Deadline:
"Google, the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers (AAP) need more time to revise the proposed settlement of the copyright infringement lawsuits the author and publisher organizations brought against Google over its Book Search program.
Google and the plaintiffs were supposed to file the revised agreement with the court on Monday, but instead they have asked the judge to give them until the end of the week.
"The parties have sent a letter to the court asking for an extension of time until this Friday, November 13 for the filing of the amended settlement agreement," said Judy Platt, an AAP spokeswoman, via e-mail.
At press time, Judge Denny Chin from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York hadn't decided whether to grant the extension requested today."
http://www.pcworld.com/article/181752/google_plaintiffs_blow_book_search_settlement_deadline.html
"Google, the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers (AAP) need more time to revise the proposed settlement of the copyright infringement lawsuits the author and publisher organizations brought against Google over its Book Search program.
Google and the plaintiffs were supposed to file the revised agreement with the court on Monday, but instead they have asked the judge to give them until the end of the week.
"The parties have sent a letter to the court asking for an extension of time until this Friday, November 13 for the filing of the amended settlement agreement," said Judy Platt, an AAP spokeswoman, via e-mail.
At press time, Judge Denny Chin from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York hadn't decided whether to grant the extension requested today."
http://www.pcworld.com/article/181752/google_plaintiffs_blow_book_search_settlement_deadline.html
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
More Pushback Against the Google Book Search Settlement; Library Journal, 8/11/09
Norman Oder via Library Journal; More Pushback Against the Google Book Search Settlement:
"The Google Book Search Settlement, heading for a court hearing in October but also the subject of a Department of Justice antitrust inquiry, is beginning to generate more skepticism from arbiters of the public interest...
Questions of fairness
Samuelson questions whether the AAP and AG were fair representatives of the larger classes, and whether the Book Rights Registry can represent “the thousands of times larger and more diverse class of authors and publishers of books from all over the world.”
She noted, for example, that many academic authors “would much rather make their works available on an open access basis than to sign up with the Registry.”
Her subsequent column will explore why the Antitrust Division is investigating. In response, Law professor Mike Madison predicted, “The Justice Department will, in the end, facilitate a deal that gives other book scanning projects a release regarding orphan works that is comparable to what Google is getting via the settlement.”
Should authors opt out?
Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that agency William Morris Endeavor has advised authors it represents to opt out of the settlement because it would “bind copyright owners in any book published prior to January 9, 2009 to its terms.”
The Authors Guild responded that William Morris was off-base."
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6675916.html
"The Google Book Search Settlement, heading for a court hearing in October but also the subject of a Department of Justice antitrust inquiry, is beginning to generate more skepticism from arbiters of the public interest...
Questions of fairness
Samuelson questions whether the AAP and AG were fair representatives of the larger classes, and whether the Book Rights Registry can represent “the thousands of times larger and more diverse class of authors and publishers of books from all over the world.”
She noted, for example, that many academic authors “would much rather make their works available on an open access basis than to sign up with the Registry.”
Her subsequent column will explore why the Antitrust Division is investigating. In response, Law professor Mike Madison predicted, “The Justice Department will, in the end, facilitate a deal that gives other book scanning projects a release regarding orphan works that is comparable to what Google is getting via the settlement.”
Should authors opt out?
Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that agency William Morris Endeavor has advised authors it represents to opt out of the settlement because it would “bind copyright owners in any book published prior to January 9, 2009 to its terms.”
The Authors Guild responded that William Morris was off-base."
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6675916.html
Sunday, August 16, 2009
The Audacity of the Google Book Search Settlement; Huffington Post, 8/10/09
Pamela Samuelson via Huffington Post; The Audacity of the Google Book Search Settlement:
"Sorry, Kindle. The Google Book Search settlement will be, if approved, the most significant book industry development in the modern era. Exploiting an opportunity made possible by lawsuits brought by a small number of plaintiffs on one narrow issue, Google has negotiated a settlement agreement designed to give it a compulsory license to all books in copyright throughout the world forever. This settlement will transform the future of the book industry and of public access to the cultural heritage of mankind embodied in books. How audacious is that? "
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pamela-samuelson/the-audacity-of-the-googl_b_255490.html
"Sorry, Kindle. The Google Book Search settlement will be, if approved, the most significant book industry development in the modern era. Exploiting an opportunity made possible by lawsuits brought by a small number of plaintiffs on one narrow issue, Google has negotiated a settlement agreement designed to give it a compulsory license to all books in copyright throughout the world forever. This settlement will transform the future of the book industry and of public access to the cultural heritage of mankind embodied in books. How audacious is that? "
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pamela-samuelson/the-audacity-of-the-googl_b_255490.html
Monday, June 29, 2009
Blount Says Orphan Works No Reason to Block Google Settlement; Benefits Touted; Publishers Weekly, 6/25/09
Jim Milliott via Publishers Weekly; Blount Says Orphan Works No Reason to Block Google Settlement; Benefits Touted:
"Wednesday afternoon, the publishers’ partner in the deal, the Authors Guild, posted a letter on its Web site from [Authors] Guild president Roy Blount Jr. talking about orphan works and the benefits the settlement will bring to authors, publishers and readers.
Blount played down concerns expressed by some over orphan works , writing, “ I can’t see any reason to dissent from the settlement over the matter of orphan books.” "
http://www.publishersweekly.com/index.asp?layout=talkbackCommentsFull&talk_back_header_id=6607570&articleid=CA6667338
"Wednesday afternoon, the publishers’ partner in the deal, the Authors Guild, posted a letter on its Web site from [Authors] Guild president Roy Blount Jr. talking about orphan works and the benefits the settlement will bring to authors, publishers and readers.
Blount played down concerns expressed by some over orphan works , writing, “ I can’t see any reason to dissent from the settlement over the matter of orphan books.” "
http://www.publishersweekly.com/index.asp?layout=talkbackCommentsFull&talk_back_header_id=6607570&articleid=CA6667338
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Authors Guild defends Google Books settlement; L.A. Times, 6/25/09
L.A. Times; Authors Guild defends Google Books settlement:
"The Authors Guild, which hasn't said much since last fall after it settled its lawsuit with Google over the search company's book scanning project, today issued a statement defending the settlement against recent criticism.
Specifically, the letter by author and Guild President Roy Blount Jr. addresses the topic of orphan books, which are works that are out-of-print and unclaimed by any copyright holders. You can read the entire letter here."
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/06/googlebookssettlementauthorsguild.html
"The Authors Guild, which hasn't said much since last fall after it settled its lawsuit with Google over the search company's book scanning project, today issued a statement defending the settlement against recent criticism.
Specifically, the letter by author and Guild President Roy Blount Jr. addresses the topic of orphan books, which are works that are out-of-print and unclaimed by any copyright holders. You can read the entire letter here."
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/06/googlebookssettlementauthorsguild.html
Sunday, June 14, 2009
As US gov’t circles the wagons, Google’s brass stays cool; Christian Science Monitor, 6/11/09
Matthew Shaer via Christian Science Monitor; As US gov’t circles the wagons, Google’s brass stays cool:
"A day after Google acknowledged it was being investigated by the US Justice Department, two of the company’s lawyers said they saw no cause for concern.
“Most of these issues don’t deal with our core business,” said Dana Wagner, a competition lawyer for Google said yesterday, according to The Wall Street Journal. The newspaper also quoted Google’s chief legal officer David Drummond, who declined to comment on the specifics of the case.
“We hear people’s concerns and we want to address them,” Drummond said. He said he expected Google’s recent settlement on its Book Search project to be approved."
http://features.csmonitor.com/innovation/2009/06/11/as-us-govt-circles-the-wagons-googles-brass-stays-cool/
"A day after Google acknowledged it was being investigated by the US Justice Department, two of the company’s lawyers said they saw no cause for concern.
“Most of these issues don’t deal with our core business,” said Dana Wagner, a competition lawyer for Google said yesterday, according to The Wall Street Journal. The newspaper also quoted Google’s chief legal officer David Drummond, who declined to comment on the specifics of the case.
“We hear people’s concerns and we want to address them,” Drummond said. He said he expected Google’s recent settlement on its Book Search project to be approved."
http://features.csmonitor.com/innovation/2009/06/11/as-us-govt-circles-the-wagons-googles-brass-stays-cool/
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Amazon lets authors mute Kindle books read-aloud feature (AFP), Yahoo Tech, 2/28/09
Via Yahoo Tech: Amazon lets authors mute Kindle books read-aloud feature (AFP):
"Amazon is yielding to concerns of authors by letting them selectively silence a read-aloud feature in Kindle 2 electronic book readers that hit the market in February.
The US Authors Guild had warned that the new Kindle feature could pose a "significant challenge" to the publishing industry and hinted at possible legal action by saying they were studying the matter closely.
"Kindle 2's experimental text-to-speech feature is legal: no copy is made, no derivative work is created, and no performance is being given," Amazon said late Friday in an announcement posted online."
http://tech.yahoo.com/news/afp/usitinternetkindleamazoncopyright
"Amazon is yielding to concerns of authors by letting them selectively silence a read-aloud feature in Kindle 2 electronic book readers that hit the market in February.
The US Authors Guild had warned that the new Kindle feature could pose a "significant challenge" to the publishing industry and hinted at possible legal action by saying they were studying the matter closely.
"Kindle 2's experimental text-to-speech feature is legal: no copy is made, no derivative work is created, and no performance is being given," Amazon said late Friday in an announcement posted online."
http://tech.yahoo.com/news/afp/usitinternetkindleamazoncopyright
Thursday, February 26, 2009
OP-ED: The Kindle Swindle?, The New York Times, 2/24/09
OP-ED, Roy Blount, Jr., Via The New York Times: The Kindle Swindle?:
"The Kindle 2 is a portable, wireless, paperback-size device onto which people can download a virtual library of digitalized titles. Amazon sells these downloads, and where the books are under copyright, it pays royalties to the authors and publishers.
Serves readers, pays writers: so far, so good. But there’s another thing about Kindle 2 — its heavily marketed text-to-speech function. Kindle 2 can read books aloud. And Kindle 2 is not paying anyone for audio rights...
What the guild is asserting is that authors have a right to a fair share of the value that audio adds to Kindle 2’s version of books. For this, the guild is being assailed. On the National Federation of the Blind’s Web site, the guild is accused of arguing that it is illegal for blind people to use “readers, either human or machine, to access books that are not available in alternative formats like Braille or audio.”
In fact, publishers, authors and American copyright laws have long provided for free audio availability to the blind and the guild is all for technologies that expand that availability. (The federation, though, points out that blind readers can’t independently use the Kindle 2’s visual, on-screen controls.) But that doesn’t mean Amazon should be able, without copyright-holders’ participation, to pass that service on to everyone."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/opinion/25blount.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=copyright&st=cse
"The Kindle 2 is a portable, wireless, paperback-size device onto which people can download a virtual library of digitalized titles. Amazon sells these downloads, and where the books are under copyright, it pays royalties to the authors and publishers.
Serves readers, pays writers: so far, so good. But there’s another thing about Kindle 2 — its heavily marketed text-to-speech function. Kindle 2 can read books aloud. And Kindle 2 is not paying anyone for audio rights...
What the guild is asserting is that authors have a right to a fair share of the value that audio adds to Kindle 2’s version of books. For this, the guild is being assailed. On the National Federation of the Blind’s Web site, the guild is accused of arguing that it is illegal for blind people to use “readers, either human or machine, to access books that are not available in alternative formats like Braille or audio.”
In fact, publishers, authors and American copyright laws have long provided for free audio availability to the blind and the guild is all for technologies that expand that availability. (The federation, though, points out that blind readers can’t independently use the Kindle 2’s visual, on-screen controls.) But that doesn’t mean Amazon should be able, without copyright-holders’ participation, to pass that service on to everyone."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/opinion/25blount.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=copyright&st=cse
Thursday, December 18, 2008
OpEd: Editorial: Google Deal or Rip-Off?, Via Library Journal, 12/15/08
OpEd: Via Library Journal: Editorial: Google Deal or Rip-Off?:
"One public access terminal per public library building. Institutional database subscriptions for academic and public libraries that secure once freely available material in a contractual lockbox, which librarians already know too well from costly e-journal and e-reference database deals. No remote access for public libraries without approval from the publisher/author Book Rights Registry, set up to administer the program. And no copying or pasting from that institutional database, though you can print pages for a fee. Of course, you can always purchase the book, too.
Those are just a few of the choice tidbits from the 200-page settlement in the Association of American Publishers (AAP) and Authors Guild three-year-old suit against Google, drawn from Jonathan Band's “Guide for the Perplexed: Libraries and the Google Library Project Settlement.” Band's report was commissioned by the American Library Association and the Association of Research Libraries...
The restrictions were obviously too much for one of the original five Google partners, Harvard University Library (HUL), which criticized the settlement. Robert Darnton, the HUL director, said the deal had “too many potential limitations on access to and use of books” for academia and public libraries and questioned what the price for access would be, given that “the subscription service will have no real competitors.”"
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6618842.html
"One public access terminal per public library building. Institutional database subscriptions for academic and public libraries that secure once freely available material in a contractual lockbox, which librarians already know too well from costly e-journal and e-reference database deals. No remote access for public libraries without approval from the publisher/author Book Rights Registry, set up to administer the program. And no copying or pasting from that institutional database, though you can print pages for a fee. Of course, you can always purchase the book, too.
Those are just a few of the choice tidbits from the 200-page settlement in the Association of American Publishers (AAP) and Authors Guild three-year-old suit against Google, drawn from Jonathan Band's “Guide for the Perplexed: Libraries and the Google Library Project Settlement.” Band's report was commissioned by the American Library Association and the Association of Research Libraries...
The restrictions were obviously too much for one of the original five Google partners, Harvard University Library (HUL), which criticized the settlement. Robert Darnton, the HUL director, said the deal had “too many potential limitations on access to and use of books” for academia and public libraries and questioned what the price for access would be, given that “the subscription service will have no real competitors.”"
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6618842.html
Friday, December 12, 2008
Google adds magazines to online book archive, Sydney Morning Herald, 12/10/08
Via Sydney Morning Herald: Google adds magazines to online book archive:
"Google announced on Tuesday that it had begun adding magazines to its online archive of books in a partnership with publishers...
A search on books.google.com will now not only bring up links to relevant books but also to magazine articles related to the query. Users can also use advanced search on Google Book Search to search through magazines only...
In late October, Google settled a copyright dispute with the Association of American Publishers and the Authors Guild over the Internet giant's plans to scan millions of books."
http://news.smh.com.au/technology/google-adds-magazines-to-online-book-archive-20081210-6v91.html
"Google announced on Tuesday that it had begun adding magazines to its online archive of books in a partnership with publishers...
A search on books.google.com will now not only bring up links to relevant books but also to magazine articles related to the query. Users can also use advanced search on Google Book Search to search through magazines only...
In late October, Google settled a copyright dispute with the Association of American Publishers and the Authors Guild over the Internet giant's plans to scan millions of books."
http://news.smh.com.au/technology/google-adds-magazines-to-online-book-archive-20081210-6v91.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)