Congress to Weigh Google Books Settlement; New York Times, 9/9/09

Miguel Helft via New York Times; Congress to Weigh Google Books Settlement:

"On Thursday, the House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing titled Competition and Commerce in Digital Books that will be all about the landmark settlement of the class action filed by the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers against Google in 2005.

Although the hearing is likely to attract some attention, the voice that settlement watchers are most eager to hear is that of the Justice Department, whose lawyers are investigating whether the agreement violates antitrust law. The Justice Department has until Sept. 18 to file its views with the court.

The debate Thursday is certain to be lively, with Google’s top lawyer, David Drummond, squaring off against Amazon’s top public policy executive, Paul Misener. Other speakers include Paul Aiken of the Authors Guild, Marc Mauer of the National Federation of the Blind and David Balto of the Center for American Progress, who support the deal.

Others witnesses are likely to cast a more skeptical eye on the agreement, including John Simpson of Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit that has opposed the agreement; Randall Picker, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School who has raised antitrust concerns; and Marybeth Peters, the head of the United States Copyright Office, who has also raised questions about the deal."

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/congress-to-weigh-google-books-settlement/?hpw

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/

Opinion: Justice Department's fear of Google book publishing is misplaced; San Jose Mercury News, 7/22/09

Jonathan Hillel via San Jose Mercury News; Opinion: Justice Department's fear of Google book publishing is misplaced:

"Many of the public comments decrying the settlement come from Google's largest competitors. The Internet Archive, which has scanned 1.5 million books to date, claims that Google will monopolize the market for orphaned texts. But the comments by the Archive and others ignore a crucial fact.

The fact that orphan works are out of print implies that these books have little if any market value, and publishers do not consider them profitable to sell. Therefore, they are only available at the few libraries that stock them. In this state, orphan works are unlikely to ever be rediscovered by the market or gain popularity.

Digitizing orphan works will make them available, but there is no guarantee they would acquire market value or earn a profit. Google is paying a high upfront cost for this gambit in both infrastructure investment and settlement payments.

Given all that investment, antitrust penalties on Google would allow its competitors to free-ride on its investment. Internet Archive President Peter Brantley has advocated requiring open access to the orphan works. In practice, that would mean that after Google pays to scan all orphan works, its competitors will be able to pick and choose which ones to offer...

Google is creating a market for orphan works and is making them available for widespread access. Antitrust interference will only distort market incentives and hinder the growth of this nascent sector."

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_12893298

Google Image Search Plays Nice with Creative Commons for Bloggers; eWeek.com, 7/10/09

Clint Boulton via eWeek.com; Google Image Search Plays Nice with Creative Commons for Bloggers:

"Google adds a usage rights tool in its Image Search to help users find images protected by Creative Commons and other fair use licenses. The move should help the search engine giant fortify its position as a company that respects copyright holders as it seeks to fend off a Justice Department inquiry over its Google Book Search deal...

Naturally, the Creative Commons representatives were thrilled with Google's new Image Search tool. Every time a technology provider implements technology that helps uphold Creative Commons licenses, it lends greater validity to the cause to foster fair use.

"This is a huge step forward for the future of image search on the Web, so congratulations to the Google team on another great CC implementation!" Creative Commons rep Fred Benenson wrote in a blog.

The move is a huge step for Google, which has not always endeared itself to copyright holders in the past and may soon have to defend itself against a formal inquiry by the U.S. Justice Department over Google Book Search, its sweeping plan to digitize the world's books and make them accessible to users and libraries over the Internet for fees."

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Search-Engines/Google-Image-Search-Plays-Nice-With-Creative-Commons-For-Bloggers-564223/

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

Justice Department Formalizes Probe of Google Books Settlement; Wired, 7/2/09

John C. Abell via Wired; Justice Department Formalizes Probe of Google Books Settlement:

"The settlement, between Google and book authors and publishers, allows the search giant to [sic] to create the worlds’ largest digital library by scanning millions of books housed in the nation’s research libraries. Depending on the copyright status of the book, Google shows snippets to full-texts of the books online and in search results. That prompted the Author’s Guild to sue Google in 2005, leading to a settlement in 2007 that covers all book copyright holders. That deal gives Google various legal rights to scan, index, display and sell all books in print online.

A number of parties have objected to the terms of the deal, including Microsoft, consumer groups and the heirs of Philip K. Dick. The main objection to the deal is the way in which so-called orphan works are treated. Under the terms of the agreement Google is protected from copyright infringement from authors who abandoned their books by not registering in its books database. If they show up later, all they can do is collect a little cash, change their book price or ask Google to stop selling the book. Otherwise infringement can be up to $150,000 per violation."

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/07/justice-department-formalizes-probe-of-google-books-settlement/

U.S. Presses Antitrust Inquiry Into Google Book Settlement; New York Times, 6/10/09

Miguel Helft via New York Times; U.S. Presses Antitrust Inquiry Into Google Book Settlement:

"In a sign that the government has stepped up its antitrust investigation of a class-action settlement between Google and groups representing authors and publishers, the Justice Department has issued formal requests for information to several of the parties involved.

The Justice Department has sent the requests, called civil investigative demands, to various parties, including Google, the Association of American Publishers, the Authors Guild and individual publishers, said Michael J. Boni, a partner at Boni & Zack, who represented the Authors Guild in negotiations with Google.

“They are asking for a lot of information,” Mr. Boni said. “It signals that they are serious about the antitrust implications of the settlement.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/technology/companies/10book.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=google%20book&st=cse

Google's Book Search Deal: 5 Pros and 5 Cons; PC World, 4/29/09

Via PC World; Google's Book Search Deal: 5 Pros and 5 Cons:

"Understanding Google's Settlement

The Book Search settlement, announced in October, followed a three-year battle over Google's right to display copyrighted books on its Web site. The Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers claimed Google was violating copyrights by doing so. Google eventually agreed to pay $125 million to ensure authors and publishers could register to receive payments anytime their books were viewed within the service.

The deal is proving to be quite divisive, and now, with the Justice Department's reported antitrust investigation, things could get even more dicey. Here's a look at five key arguments from both sides of the debate."

http://www.pcworld.com/article/164096/googles_book_search_deal_5_pros_and_5_cons.html

Justice Dept. Opens Antitrust Inquiry Into Google Books Deal; The New York Times, 4/28/09

Via The New York Times: Justice Dept. Opens Antitrust Inquiry Into Google Books Deal:

"The Justice Department has begun an inquiry into the antitrust implications of Google’s settlement with authors and publishers over its Google Book Search service, two people briefed on the matter said Tuesday.

Lawyers for the Justice Department have been in conversations in recent weeks with various groups opposed to the settlement, including the Internet Archive and Consumer Watchdog. More recently, Justice Department lawyers notified the parties to the settlement, including Google, and representatives for the Association of American Publishers and the Authors Guild, that they were looking into various antitrust issues related to the far-reaching agreement.

The inquiry does not necessarily mean that the department will oppose the settlement, which is subject to a court review. But it suggests that some of the concerns raised by critics, who say the settlement would unfairly give Google an exclusive license to profit from millions of books, have resonated with the Justice Department."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/29/technology/internet/29google.html