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
Showing posts with label Judge Denny Chin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Judge Denny Chin. Show all posts
Monday, November 9, 2009
Friday, October 23, 2009
EFF Urges Court to Ensure Fairness in Google Book Search Amendment Process; Electronic Frontier Foundation, 10/22/09
Cindy Cohn, Electronic Frontier Foundation; EFF Urges Court to Ensure Fairness in Google Book Search Amendment Process:
"EFF today led a coalition of authors, publishers, companies and nonprofit organizations in sending a letter to the judge overseeing the Google Book Search settlement urging the Court to ensure that those concerned about the settlement receive adequate notice of, and have sufficient time to study and comment on, any amended settlement agreement that Google, the Authors Guild, and the Association of American Publishers present.
Those following the twists and turns of the Google Book Search settlement will recall that the original Fairness Hearing scheduled for October 7, 2009, was put off because of what the Court called: "significant issues, as demonstrated not only by the number of objections, but also by the fact that the objectors include countries, states, non-profit organizations, and prominent authors and law professors." The Court received over 400 submissions about the settlement, including the EFF-led coalition of authors and publishers concerned about reader privacy, as well as significant concerns raised by the Department of Justice.
As a result, the parties have promised the Court that they will submit an amended settlement on November 9, 2009. Today's letter arises from the parties' discussions with the Court in which they have suggested that the amendments to the already complex agreement be subject to limited notice and ability to comment and a truncated schedule ending with a Fairness Hearing in late December or early November. It states: "We signatories raised different specific concerns and issues about this settlement from a number of different vantage points. We are united, however, in our concern that the parties' requests to limit notice and the time and scope of objections will be unfair to us and to other class members."
The Google Book Settlement is simply too important -- and too complex -- to be rushed through the court approval processes without sufficient opportunity for analysis and comment."
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/eff-urges-court-ensure-fairness-google-book-search
"EFF today led a coalition of authors, publishers, companies and nonprofit organizations in sending a letter to the judge overseeing the Google Book Search settlement urging the Court to ensure that those concerned about the settlement receive adequate notice of, and have sufficient time to study and comment on, any amended settlement agreement that Google, the Authors Guild, and the Association of American Publishers present.
Those following the twists and turns of the Google Book Search settlement will recall that the original Fairness Hearing scheduled for October 7, 2009, was put off because of what the Court called: "significant issues, as demonstrated not only by the number of objections, but also by the fact that the objectors include countries, states, non-profit organizations, and prominent authors and law professors." The Court received over 400 submissions about the settlement, including the EFF-led coalition of authors and publishers concerned about reader privacy, as well as significant concerns raised by the Department of Justice.
As a result, the parties have promised the Court that they will submit an amended settlement on November 9, 2009. Today's letter arises from the parties' discussions with the Court in which they have suggested that the amendments to the already complex agreement be subject to limited notice and ability to comment and a truncated schedule ending with a Fairness Hearing in late December or early November. It states: "We signatories raised different specific concerns and issues about this settlement from a number of different vantage points. We are united, however, in our concern that the parties' requests to limit notice and the time and scope of objections will be unfair to us and to other class members."
The Google Book Settlement is simply too important -- and too complex -- to be rushed through the court approval processes without sufficient opportunity for analysis and comment."
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/eff-urges-court-ensure-fairness-google-book-search
Friday, September 25, 2009
Judge delays Google books hearing; BBC News, 9/25/09
Maggie Shiels, BBC News; Judge delays Google books hearing:
""Clearly voices such as ours had an impact on Judge Chin," wrote consumer watchdog advocate John Simpson in an email to BBC News.
"There was no way the proposed settlement could go forward. We believe that the proper place to solve many of the case's thorniest problems, such as that of orphan books, is in Congress because it is important to build digital libraries."
Orphan books - of which there are thought to be five million - are titles where the authors cannot be found.
Judge Chin has called for a "status conference" to be held on 7 October - the original date for the hearing - to determine "how to proceed with the case as expeditiously as possible". "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8274115.stm
""Clearly voices such as ours had an impact on Judge Chin," wrote consumer watchdog advocate John Simpson in an email to BBC News.
"There was no way the proposed settlement could go forward. We believe that the proper place to solve many of the case's thorniest problems, such as that of orphan books, is in Congress because it is important to build digital libraries."
Orphan books - of which there are thought to be five million - are titles where the authors cannot be found.
Judge Chin has called for a "status conference" to be held on 7 October - the original date for the hearing - to determine "how to proceed with the case as expeditiously as possible". "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8274115.stm
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Google Books Settlement Delayed Indefinitely; New York Times Bits Blog, 9/24/09
Miguel Helft, Google Books Settlement Delayed Indefinitely; Google Books Settlement Delayed Indefinitely:
"Judge Denny Chin of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted a motion to delay an Oct. 7 hearing on the settlement, which would pave the way for Google to create an immense digital library and bookstore. The motion was filed earlier this week by the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers, the plaintiffs in the case, and was unopposed by Google, the defendant.
Judge Chin said that it made no sense to hold a hearing on the current settlement since the parties have indicated that they are negotiating significant changes to it."
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/24/google-books-settlement-delayed-indefinitely/?hpw
"Judge Denny Chin of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted a motion to delay an Oct. 7 hearing on the settlement, which would pave the way for Google to create an immense digital library and bookstore. The motion was filed earlier this week by the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers, the plaintiffs in the case, and was unopposed by Google, the defendant.
Judge Chin said that it made no sense to hold a hearing on the current settlement since the parties have indicated that they are negotiating significant changes to it."
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/24/google-books-settlement-delayed-indefinitely/?hpw
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
New deal sought in dispute over Google book plan; Associated Press, 9/22/09
Larry Neumeister, Associated Press; New deal sought in dispute over Google book plan:
"The government encouraged an improved settlement, saying it "has the potential to breathe life into millions of works that are now effectively off limits to the public."
Lawyers for the authors and publishers said in court papers Tuesday that, "as the United States government put it, no one wants `the opportunity or momentum to be lost.'"
They urged Chin to delay a hearing scheduled for Oct. 7, saying that a new agreement may take away some objections among the roughly 400 opinions, both pro and con, which were filed with Chin by a deadline earlier this month...
Consumer Watchdog, a nonpartisan, nonprofit consumer advocacy group that has asked the court to reject the settlement, said in a statement that key copyright issues should be settled by Congress in a fully public process.
"Essentially Google and the authors and publishers groups are back at square one and must re-negotiate the deal," said John M. Simpson, a consumer advocate with Consumer Watchdog who was one of eight witnesses to testify about the deal to the House Judiciary Committee."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gdFC6FPR3nJfAKfpAUEEsmkZjqWAD9ASM9G00
"The government encouraged an improved settlement, saying it "has the potential to breathe life into millions of works that are now effectively off limits to the public."
Lawyers for the authors and publishers said in court papers Tuesday that, "as the United States government put it, no one wants `the opportunity or momentum to be lost.'"
They urged Chin to delay a hearing scheduled for Oct. 7, saying that a new agreement may take away some objections among the roughly 400 opinions, both pro and con, which were filed with Chin by a deadline earlier this month...
Consumer Watchdog, a nonpartisan, nonprofit consumer advocacy group that has asked the court to reject the settlement, said in a statement that key copyright issues should be settled by Congress in a fully public process.
"Essentially Google and the authors and publishers groups are back at square one and must re-negotiate the deal," said John M. Simpson, a consumer advocate with Consumer Watchdog who was one of eight witnesses to testify about the deal to the House Judiciary Committee."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gdFC6FPR3nJfAKfpAUEEsmkZjqWAD9ASM9G00
Saturday, September 19, 2009
U.S. Urges Court to Reject Google Book Deal; New York Times, 9/18/09
Reuters via New York Times; U.S. Urges Court to Reject Google Book Deal:
"The U.S. Justice Department urged a New York court on Friday to reject Google's controversial deal with authors and publishers that would allow the search engine giant to create a massive online digital library.
The Justice Department said in a filing that the court "should reject the proposed settlement in its current form and encourage the parties to continue negotiations to modify it so as to comply with ... copyright and antitrust laws...
A fairness hearing on the deal has been set for October 7 in the federal court in Manhattan.
The case is Authors Guild et al v Google Inc 05-08136 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan)"
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/09/18/technology/tech-us-google-books.html
"The U.S. Justice Department urged a New York court on Friday to reject Google's controversial deal with authors and publishers that would allow the search engine giant to create a massive online digital library.
The Justice Department said in a filing that the court "should reject the proposed settlement in its current form and encourage the parties to continue negotiations to modify it so as to comply with ... copyright and antitrust laws...
A fairness hearing on the deal has been set for October 7 in the federal court in Manhattan.
The case is Authors Guild et al v Google Inc 05-08136 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan)"
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/09/18/technology/tech-us-google-books.html
Friday, September 18, 2009
Court Acknowledges More Than 400 Submissions in Google Settlement; Publishers Weekly, 9/16/09
Andrew Albanese, Publishers Weekly; Court Acknowledges More Than 400 Submissions in Google Settlement:
"In an order posted Wednesday, federal judge Denny Chin said the fairness hearing for the Google Book Search Settlement scheduled for October 7 will go forward, and acknowledged receipt of more than 400 written filings. In the order, Chin gave the parties in the settlement until October 2 to respond in writing to the filings, and laid out the procedures that will govern the hearing.
Those wishing to speak at the hearing have until September 21 to request time via e-mail, and will be notified by September 25 whether they will be permitted to address the court. In the order, Chin also said the court would review all the written filings in the case. One major filing, however, still looms—Chin had previously given the Department of Justice until September 18 to file its written comments with the court.
Bloomberg, meanwhile, reported that Google, publishers and authors are in talks with the Justice Department on ways to address any concerns the department may have about the deal."
http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6697405.html?desc=topstory
"In an order posted Wednesday, federal judge Denny Chin said the fairness hearing for the Google Book Search Settlement scheduled for October 7 will go forward, and acknowledged receipt of more than 400 written filings. In the order, Chin gave the parties in the settlement until October 2 to respond in writing to the filings, and laid out the procedures that will govern the hearing.
Those wishing to speak at the hearing have until September 21 to request time via e-mail, and will be notified by September 25 whether they will be permitted to address the court. In the order, Chin also said the court would review all the written filings in the case. One major filing, however, still looms—Chin had previously given the Department of Justice until September 18 to file its written comments with the court.
Bloomberg, meanwhile, reported that Google, publishers and authors are in talks with the Justice Department on ways to address any concerns the department may have about the deal."
http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6697405.html?desc=topstory
Judge may limit speakers in Google books hearing; Associated Press, 9/17/09
Associated Press; Judge may limit speakers in Google books hearing:
"A New York judge says about 400 submissions were filed with his chambers prior to a hearing on a hotly disputed class-action settlement that would give Google Inc. the digital rights to millions of out-of-print books.
Federal Judge Denny Chin said Wednesday he may have to limit the number of speakers and how long each can speak at an Oct. 7 fairness hearing for the settlement in Manhattan.
He said anyone who wishes to speak must submit a request in writing by Monday at googlebookcase(at)nysd.uscourts.gov. Those permitted to speak will be notified by e-mail by Sept. 25."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5isXQXVfWnyJKN1Bit-Yttl1PHuCwD9AOMCMO2
"A New York judge says about 400 submissions were filed with his chambers prior to a hearing on a hotly disputed class-action settlement that would give Google Inc. the digital rights to millions of out-of-print books.
Federal Judge Denny Chin said Wednesday he may have to limit the number of speakers and how long each can speak at an Oct. 7 fairness hearing for the settlement in Manhattan.
He said anyone who wishes to speak must submit a request in writing by Monday at googlebookcase(at)nysd.uscourts.gov. Those permitted to speak will be notified by e-mail by Sept. 25."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5isXQXVfWnyJKN1Bit-Yttl1PHuCwD9AOMCMO2
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
11th-Hour Filings Oppose Google’s Book Settlement; New York Times, 9/8/09
Miguel Helft via New York Times; 11th-Hour Filings Oppose Google’s Book Settlement:
"“Legal scholars say that Judge Chin will have to address not only whether the settlement is fair to the authors, publishers and rights holders covered by it, but also whether it benefits the public at large.
“The number and quality of opposition filings is very unusual,” said Jay Tidmarsh, a professor of law at Notre Dame Law School. “The court is going to have to look at the public interest in the settlement.”
The agreement, which would bring millions of rarely seen books online, has clear benefits to readers and authors. But scholars say the judge is likely to weigh those benefits against arguments that the settlement would limit competition. Opponents say it would give Google a quasi-exclusive license to profit from millions of out-of-print books and create a consortium that would have power to set prices for digital books. Google, the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers have vigorously disputed those claims, but the claims are being investigated by the Justice Department...
If the judge has some significant concerns, it is much more likely that he would invite the parties to address those concerns rather than reject the agreement,” said Andrew I. Gavil, a law professor at Howard University. Professor Gavil said that Judge Chin was likely to give special consideration to the opinion of the Justice Department, which has until Sept. 18 to make its views known. A hearing on the settlement is scheduled for Oct. 7...
Google should be ordered to license the database with all attendant rights to a number of competitors, under the supervision of the Justice Department,” Mr. Reback wrote in the brief. He traced the birth of Silicon Valley to a similar “compulsory license” mandated by the Justice Department. “Silicon Valley exists precisely because the Antitrust Division ordered AT&T to license its key invention, the transistor, for nominal payments,” he wrote.
Defenders of the agreement say the antitrust concerns are unfounded, and argue that others besides Google could obtain similar licenses without any mandates from the court."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/technology/internet/09google.html?_r=1&hpw
"“Legal scholars say that Judge Chin will have to address not only whether the settlement is fair to the authors, publishers and rights holders covered by it, but also whether it benefits the public at large.
“The number and quality of opposition filings is very unusual,” said Jay Tidmarsh, a professor of law at Notre Dame Law School. “The court is going to have to look at the public interest in the settlement.”
The agreement, which would bring millions of rarely seen books online, has clear benefits to readers and authors. But scholars say the judge is likely to weigh those benefits against arguments that the settlement would limit competition. Opponents say it would give Google a quasi-exclusive license to profit from millions of out-of-print books and create a consortium that would have power to set prices for digital books. Google, the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers have vigorously disputed those claims, but the claims are being investigated by the Justice Department...
If the judge has some significant concerns, it is much more likely that he would invite the parties to address those concerns rather than reject the agreement,” said Andrew I. Gavil, a law professor at Howard University. Professor Gavil said that Judge Chin was likely to give special consideration to the opinion of the Justice Department, which has until Sept. 18 to make its views known. A hearing on the settlement is scheduled for Oct. 7...
Google should be ordered to license the database with all attendant rights to a number of competitors, under the supervision of the Justice Department,” Mr. Reback wrote in the brief. He traced the birth of Silicon Valley to a similar “compulsory license” mandated by the Justice Department. “Silicon Valley exists precisely because the Antitrust Division ordered AT&T to license its key invention, the transistor, for nominal payments,” he wrote.
Defenders of the agreement say the antitrust concerns are unfounded, and argue that others besides Google could obtain similar licenses without any mandates from the court."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/technology/internet/09google.html?_r=1&hpw
Sunday, September 6, 2009
I'm booking a seat for Google's battle to buy our literary heritage; Observer, 9/6/09
John Naughton via Observer; I'm booking a seat for Google's battle to buy our literary heritage:
"On the one hand, Google clearly has the capacity to make available everything that's ever been published in print - so that anyone with an internet connection can, in principle (and sometimes for a fee), read books otherwise buried in the collections of elite university libraries. And there's clearly a social benefit in that.
On the other hand, think of the downsides. A single commercial company will control much of our cultural heritage. Because it's a settlement based on a class action suit, it will give Google a uniquely privileged position in relation to "orphan" works - ie, those which are still in copyright but for which no owner can be located - which will not be enjoyed by anyone else. And thirdly, it will hand the power to determine access fees to a pair of unaccountable monopolies - Google and the digital rights registry. So it's deeply anti-competitive.
There is a simple remedy for much of this: a change in the law to reverse the fact that copyright infringement carries strict liability, which means that there is effectively no limit on damages. This is why so many orphan works remain effectively unavailable: people are too scared to make them available.
But changing copyright law takes aeons and Judge Chin has to decide now. I bet he has an interesting inbox. But I wouldn't want his job for all the IP in China."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/sep/06/google-digital-books-chin
"On the one hand, Google clearly has the capacity to make available everything that's ever been published in print - so that anyone with an internet connection can, in principle (and sometimes for a fee), read books otherwise buried in the collections of elite university libraries. And there's clearly a social benefit in that.
On the other hand, think of the downsides. A single commercial company will control much of our cultural heritage. Because it's a settlement based on a class action suit, it will give Google a uniquely privileged position in relation to "orphan" works - ie, those which are still in copyright but for which no owner can be located - which will not be enjoyed by anyone else. And thirdly, it will hand the power to determine access fees to a pair of unaccountable monopolies - Google and the digital rights registry. So it's deeply anti-competitive.
There is a simple remedy for much of this: a change in the law to reverse the fact that copyright infringement carries strict liability, which means that there is effectively no limit on damages. This is why so many orphan works remain effectively unavailable: people are too scared to make them available.
But changing copyright law takes aeons and Judge Chin has to decide now. I bet he has an interesting inbox. But I wouldn't want his job for all the IP in China."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/sep/06/google-digital-books-chin
Saturday, September 5, 2009
Google brought to book over digital library; Times, 9/5/09
Mike Harvey via Times; Google brought to book over digital library:
"A US district judge named Denny Chin is on the verge of becoming one of the most important men in the history of publishing. On October 7 in a New York courtroom he will preside over a “fairness hearing” for a deal between Google and US publishers and authors to put millions of books online.
The 55-year-old Hong Kong-born judge presided over the trial of Bernard Madoff, sentencing the fraudster to 150 years in prison. The Google books settlement case is likely to send shockwaves even further afield.
Google yesterday launched a staunch defence of its plans to become the world’s librarian and bookseller. The internet giant is in the middle of a project to scan and index the world’s literary heritage. It has already digitised more than 10 million volumes in more than 100 languages and has agreements with libraries around the world to scan millions more.
Google says that the project will make a treasure trove of forgotten and out-of-print books available to anyone with an internet connection. Critics say that mankind’s “last library” should not be in the hands of a commercial enterprise."
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article6822739.ece
"A US district judge named Denny Chin is on the verge of becoming one of the most important men in the history of publishing. On October 7 in a New York courtroom he will preside over a “fairness hearing” for a deal between Google and US publishers and authors to put millions of books online.
The 55-year-old Hong Kong-born judge presided over the trial of Bernard Madoff, sentencing the fraudster to 150 years in prison. The Google books settlement case is likely to send shockwaves even further afield.
Google yesterday launched a staunch defence of its plans to become the world’s librarian and bookseller. The internet giant is in the middle of a project to scan and index the world’s literary heritage. It has already digitised more than 10 million volumes in more than 100 languages and has agreements with libraries around the world to scan millions more.
Google says that the project will make a treasure trove of forgotten and out-of-print books available to anyone with an internet connection. Critics say that mankind’s “last library” should not be in the hands of a commercial enterprise."
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article6822739.ece
Friday, August 7, 2009
Disability Group Boosts Google Book Search; Wired's Epicenter, 8/7/09
Ryan Singel via Wired's Epicenter; Disability Group Boosts Google Book Search:
"Google’s Book Search program will help the blind and wheelchair-bound read more, a disability group told a federal judge Wednesday, giving Google some much needed support in its attempt to create the online library and bookstore of the future.
The American Association of People with Disabilities told federal court judge Denny Chin that “vast numbers of books will be opened up for many people for the first time ever,” citing the fact that Google Book Search will digitize books into formats that can be used by specialized readers. The nonprofit group asked the court to approve the controversial copyright settlement that Google struck in 2007 to settle a class action lawsuit filed by authors and publishers.
That’s good news for the search and advertising giant, given the settlement is under investigation by the Justice Department and is facing stiff opposition from rights groups and some authors."
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/08/disability-group-boosts-google-book-search/
"Google’s Book Search program will help the blind and wheelchair-bound read more, a disability group told a federal judge Wednesday, giving Google some much needed support in its attempt to create the online library and bookstore of the future.
The American Association of People with Disabilities told federal court judge Denny Chin that “vast numbers of books will be opened up for many people for the first time ever,” citing the fact that Google Book Search will digitize books into formats that can be used by specialized readers. The nonprofit group asked the court to approve the controversial copyright settlement that Google struck in 2007 to settle a class action lawsuit filed by authors and publishers.
That’s good news for the search and advertising giant, given the settlement is under investigation by the Justice Department and is facing stiff opposition from rights groups and some authors."
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/08/disability-group-boosts-google-book-search/
Thursday, July 2, 2009
U.S. Confirms Investigation of Google Books Deal; New York Times, 7/2/09
Miguel Helft via New York Times; U.S. Confirms Investigation of Google Books Deal:
"Antitrust experts said the letter was the latest indication that the Justice Department is seriously examining complaints that the agreement would grant Google the exclusive right to profit from millions of so-called “orphan works,” books that are out of print and whose authors or rights holders are unknown or cannot be found.
“This is the next step in the notion that this is a serious issue, so serious that the Justice Department needs to notify the court,” said Gary L. Reback, a lawyer at Carr & Ferrell, and the author of a recent book on antitrust issues. “It sets the stage for the department to come into the court to present a problem.”...
In a response, United States District Judge Denny Chin of the Southern District of New York in Manhattan, who is charged with reviewing the settlement, set a deadline of Sept. 18 for the government to present its views in writing.
Judge Chin has scheduled a hearing on the settlement for Oct. 7 and said the government could also lay out its views orally at that time.
Opponents of the settlement hailed the department’s letter, saying it was a sign that the government was listening to their complaints.
“We are heartened that the D.O.J. is taking the concerns that we have expressed seriously,” said Peter Brantley, the director of access for the Internet Archive. Mr. Brantley’s organization is spearheading an effort to digitize books from libraries and make them broadly available, in competition with Google’s own digitization project. It has argued that the settlement would make it more difficult for the Internet Archive to pursue its plan.
Google and the other parties to the settlement have vigorously defended it.
“It’s important to note that this agreement is nonexclusive and, if approved by the court, stands to expand access to millions of books in the U.S.,” Gabriel Stricker, a Google spokesman, said in a statement. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/03/technology/companies/03google.html?_r=1&ref=technology
"Antitrust experts said the letter was the latest indication that the Justice Department is seriously examining complaints that the agreement would grant Google the exclusive right to profit from millions of so-called “orphan works,” books that are out of print and whose authors or rights holders are unknown or cannot be found.
“This is the next step in the notion that this is a serious issue, so serious that the Justice Department needs to notify the court,” said Gary L. Reback, a lawyer at Carr & Ferrell, and the author of a recent book on antitrust issues. “It sets the stage for the department to come into the court to present a problem.”...
In a response, United States District Judge Denny Chin of the Southern District of New York in Manhattan, who is charged with reviewing the settlement, set a deadline of Sept. 18 for the government to present its views in writing.
Judge Chin has scheduled a hearing on the settlement for Oct. 7 and said the government could also lay out its views orally at that time.
Opponents of the settlement hailed the department’s letter, saying it was a sign that the government was listening to their complaints.
“We are heartened that the D.O.J. is taking the concerns that we have expressed seriously,” said Peter Brantley, the director of access for the Internet Archive. Mr. Brantley’s organization is spearheading an effort to digitize books from libraries and make them broadly available, in competition with Google’s own digitization project. It has argued that the settlement would make it more difficult for the Internet Archive to pursue its plan.
Google and the other parties to the settlement have vigorously defended it.
“It’s important to note that this agreement is nonexclusive and, if approved by the court, stands to expand access to millions of books in the U.S.,” Gabriel Stricker, a Google spokesman, said in a statement. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/03/technology/companies/03google.html?_r=1&ref=technology
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)