Bobbie Johnson via Guardian; Google tries to sidestep criticism of $125m book project:
Internet giant works to gather support from proponents of digitisation scheme
"Google today attempted to rally supporters of its deal with the US publishing industry, in an effort to combat growing criticism of the $125m (£76m) agreement.
In a press conference today, Google said its settlement with the Association of American Publishers and the Authors Guild - which was first agreed to last year - would allow millions of books to be digitised, proving many people with the chance to access information that was otherwise unavailable to them.
"The obvious social justice and social utility impact that the book project is going to have ... are getting lost in the discussion," said Professor Lateef Mtima, director of the Institute of Intellectual Property & Social Justice at Howard University, a pioneering black college in Washington.
He suggested it would help "so many segments of our society today who for decades have been left out of the communication exchange, who have been on the wrong side of the digital divide"."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/sep/03/google-books-project-digital
Showing posts with label opt out option deadline. Show all posts
Showing posts with label opt out option deadline. Show all posts
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Deadline looms as opposition mounts to Google Book Settlement; National Post, 9/3/09
Mark Medley via National Post; Deadline looms as opposition mounts to Google Book Settlement:
Canadian authors debate whether to opt out
"Google's mission statement is at once both ambitious and admirable: "To organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful."
Keeping with that spirit, in 2004 the Internet giant launched what became known as Google Book Search -- "an enhanced card catalogue of the world's books" -- and began digitizing the collections of several libraries and universities, including Oxford and Harvard. It would allow users to search through a massive online library and view sections of the books, ranging from snippets to the entire text. More than seven million titles -- perhaps as many as 10 million -- have been scanned thus far. There was just one problem: Google didn't receive permission from the books' copyright holders. A class-action lawsuit and years of negotiations ensued, leading to the landmark Google Book Settlement reached last October. Authors, publishers, agents and lawyers have spent much of the last year analyzing the complex agreement and trying to figure out what it means for them. It's a quest to disseminate knowledge or a deal with the devil, depending on which side you're on. But one thing is clear: Opposition is growing more vocal in advance of tomorrow's deadline to opt out of the controversial agreement.
"If a complete stranger came and took your car without permission and took it for a drive, what would you call that?" asks Katherine Gordon, one of several Canadian authors leading the charge against the settlement. "It would be theft. So how is this any different?"
On Tuesday, Gordon and several other Canadian authors launched an online campaign opposing the settlement, taking Google to task for "blatant disregard for Canadian legal copyright ownership" and accusing them of keeping authors in the dark, leaving "millions of authors ... unaware their rights will be seriously compromised after Friday.""
http://www.nationalpost.com/arts/story.html?id=1957311
Canadian authors debate whether to opt out
"Google's mission statement is at once both ambitious and admirable: "To organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful."
Keeping with that spirit, in 2004 the Internet giant launched what became known as Google Book Search -- "an enhanced card catalogue of the world's books" -- and began digitizing the collections of several libraries and universities, including Oxford and Harvard. It would allow users to search through a massive online library and view sections of the books, ranging from snippets to the entire text. More than seven million titles -- perhaps as many as 10 million -- have been scanned thus far. There was just one problem: Google didn't receive permission from the books' copyright holders. A class-action lawsuit and years of negotiations ensued, leading to the landmark Google Book Settlement reached last October. Authors, publishers, agents and lawyers have spent much of the last year analyzing the complex agreement and trying to figure out what it means for them. It's a quest to disseminate knowledge or a deal with the devil, depending on which side you're on. But one thing is clear: Opposition is growing more vocal in advance of tomorrow's deadline to opt out of the controversial agreement.
"If a complete stranger came and took your car without permission and took it for a drive, what would you call that?" asks Katherine Gordon, one of several Canadian authors leading the charge against the settlement. "It would be theft. So how is this any different?"
On Tuesday, Gordon and several other Canadian authors launched an online campaign opposing the settlement, taking Google to task for "blatant disregard for Canadian legal copyright ownership" and accusing them of keeping authors in the dark, leaving "millions of authors ... unaware their rights will be seriously compromised after Friday.""
http://www.nationalpost.com/arts/story.html?id=1957311
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
O'Brien: Scrap Google book settlement and start fresh; San Jose Mercury News, 9/2/09
Chris O'Brien via San Jose Mercury News; Scrap Google book settlement and start fresh:
"At first blush, Google's plan to digitize millions of books seemed like a grand idea, opening up the world's libraries to readers everywhere.
Unfortunately, Google's effort has been clumsy from the start. The Mountain View company bulldozed into the effort in 2005 without building consensus around its plans, and then acted surprised when its motives were questioned.
The result was years of litigation and a proposed settlement that has only antagonized critics.
By Friday, authors need to decide whether they want to accept that settlement or opt out and reserve their right to sue Google.
But before then, I think Google should scrap the whole thing and go back to square one.
The proposed settlement has the potential for creating the framework for how books are digitized for the next century. The stakes for readers, authors and libraries are high.
Unfortunately, many on the outside of this process looking in feel like Google's been throwing its weight around on this issue. Google didn't exactly help matters in this regard when a spokesman was quoted on a Wall Street Journal blog calling one opposition group the "Sour Grapes Alliance." Gee, I wonder why some folks think Google can be arrogant?
It's a shame that it's come to this, because of the amazing potential behind this idea...
No doubt the idea of starting again will elicit groans from the Googleplex. Four years of litigation probably feels like an eternity for a 10-year-old company that's used to moving at Internet speed.
But it's the kind of goodwill gesture that would go a long way toward diffusing the mounting frustration among critics and begin laying the groundwork toward an equitable solution. If Google's motives are true, and I believe they are, then patience is the best course.
It's far more important to get it right than to get it done."
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_13248382
"At first blush, Google's plan to digitize millions of books seemed like a grand idea, opening up the world's libraries to readers everywhere.
Unfortunately, Google's effort has been clumsy from the start. The Mountain View company bulldozed into the effort in 2005 without building consensus around its plans, and then acted surprised when its motives were questioned.
The result was years of litigation and a proposed settlement that has only antagonized critics.
By Friday, authors need to decide whether they want to accept that settlement or opt out and reserve their right to sue Google.
But before then, I think Google should scrap the whole thing and go back to square one.
The proposed settlement has the potential for creating the framework for how books are digitized for the next century. The stakes for readers, authors and libraries are high.
Unfortunately, many on the outside of this process looking in feel like Google's been throwing its weight around on this issue. Google didn't exactly help matters in this regard when a spokesman was quoted on a Wall Street Journal blog calling one opposition group the "Sour Grapes Alliance." Gee, I wonder why some folks think Google can be arrogant?
It's a shame that it's come to this, because of the amazing potential behind this idea...
No doubt the idea of starting again will elicit groans from the Googleplex. Four years of litigation probably feels like an eternity for a 10-year-old company that's used to moving at Internet speed.
But it's the kind of goodwill gesture that would go a long way toward diffusing the mounting frustration among critics and begin laying the groundwork toward an equitable solution. If Google's motives are true, and I believe they are, then patience is the best course.
It's far more important to get it right than to get it done."
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_13248382
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
An author's guide to the Google Books flap; CNet News, 9/1/09
Tom Krazit via CNet News; An author's guide to the Google Books flap:
"The issues surrounding Google's Book Search settlement are among the most complex surrounding the company this year: what do authors need to know about their rights and responsibilities?
Google has scanned over 10 million books since 2004 in participation with libraries and publishers in hopes of creating a unique digital library and storefront, and if its pending settlement with books rights holders is approved next month at a hearing, Google will be able to make a far greater portion of those works available through its search engine. Friday is the deadline for authors to decide if they want to participate in the settlement.
The settlement has drawn attention and criticism from groups such as library ethicists and academics for the way it concentrates control of this potentially wondrous public good in the hands of a for-profit company. The Department of Justice is also taking a look at the settlement, which has the potential to throw a large roadblock ahead of the project.
Authors, however, have a few choices to make as they ponder Friday's deadline. Here's a sampling of what they need to know:..."
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30684_3-10322574-265.html
"The issues surrounding Google's Book Search settlement are among the most complex surrounding the company this year: what do authors need to know about their rights and responsibilities?
Google has scanned over 10 million books since 2004 in participation with libraries and publishers in hopes of creating a unique digital library and storefront, and if its pending settlement with books rights holders is approved next month at a hearing, Google will be able to make a far greater portion of those works available through its search engine. Friday is the deadline for authors to decide if they want to participate in the settlement.
The settlement has drawn attention and criticism from groups such as library ethicists and academics for the way it concentrates control of this potentially wondrous public good in the hands of a for-profit company. The Department of Justice is also taking a look at the settlement, which has the potential to throw a large roadblock ahead of the project.
Authors, however, have a few choices to make as they ponder Friday's deadline. Here's a sampling of what they need to know:..."
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30684_3-10322574-265.html
Sunday, August 30, 2009
More questions than answers on Google Books; CNet News, 8/29/09
Tom Krazit via CNet News; More questions than answers on Google Books:
"Google's Dan Clancy had patiently answered question after question regarding Google's' Book Search settlement with publishers and authors until late in the afternoon Friday, when he was finally left speechless.
A young man from the University of California at Berkeley's School of Information asked Clancy what kind of message was sent when Google decided to "copy first and answer questions later." The question--for which there's no safe answer, if you're in Clancy's shoes--perhaps underscored the core of the opposition to the settlement, reached in October, after Google was sued in 2005 for scanning out-of-print works without explicit permission.
If the class action settlement is approved, Google stands to gain control of a priceless asset. Jason Schultz, acting director of UC Berkeley's Samuelson Law, Technology, and Public Policy Clinic, called it "the largest copyright-licensing deal in U.S. history:" the right to display the contents of out-of-print books that are still covered by copyright protection.
Google, however, has already scanned more than 10 million books. At the moment, it's not allowed to display more than a few snippets of copyright-protected books for which it doesn't have an explicit agreement with the rights holders. If the settlement is approved, Google will suddenly flip a switch and offer full-text searches of those books, as well as links to bookstores.
Nothing vexes Google's opponents more than the fact that the company assumed that it had the right to digitize nearly 100 years of written material without serious negotiations with those rights holders until it was sued. Authors have until Friday to decide if they want to opt out of the settlement and preserve the right to sue Google on their own for digitizing their book without their permission, though they can tell Google to remove their books from the Book Search archive, even if they remain in the class...
But taking Google at its word requires trust, and trust in corporations is in short supply at this point in American history. It's taken perhaps longer than it should have, but Google is gradually realizing that a fair portion of the public no longer sees it as a cute little Silicon Valley start-up with idealistic stars in its eyes, one that insists "you can make money without doing evil."
Google damaged that trust when it began scanning books without permission, arguing that it was allowed to do so under fair-use laws. Publishers and author groups also harmed that trust when they turned over the key to the castle by bringing the lawsuit as a class action, suddenly making plaintiffs out of millions of authors who did not necessarily appreciate the future value of digital books in 2005, nor authorize the negotiation of the rights to their works."
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30684_3-10321371-265.html
"Google's Dan Clancy had patiently answered question after question regarding Google's' Book Search settlement with publishers and authors until late in the afternoon Friday, when he was finally left speechless.
A young man from the University of California at Berkeley's School of Information asked Clancy what kind of message was sent when Google decided to "copy first and answer questions later." The question--for which there's no safe answer, if you're in Clancy's shoes--perhaps underscored the core of the opposition to the settlement, reached in October, after Google was sued in 2005 for scanning out-of-print works without explicit permission.
If the class action settlement is approved, Google stands to gain control of a priceless asset. Jason Schultz, acting director of UC Berkeley's Samuelson Law, Technology, and Public Policy Clinic, called it "the largest copyright-licensing deal in U.S. history:" the right to display the contents of out-of-print books that are still covered by copyright protection.
Google, however, has already scanned more than 10 million books. At the moment, it's not allowed to display more than a few snippets of copyright-protected books for which it doesn't have an explicit agreement with the rights holders. If the settlement is approved, Google will suddenly flip a switch and offer full-text searches of those books, as well as links to bookstores.
Nothing vexes Google's opponents more than the fact that the company assumed that it had the right to digitize nearly 100 years of written material without serious negotiations with those rights holders until it was sued. Authors have until Friday to decide if they want to opt out of the settlement and preserve the right to sue Google on their own for digitizing their book without their permission, though they can tell Google to remove their books from the Book Search archive, even if they remain in the class...
But taking Google at its word requires trust, and trust in corporations is in short supply at this point in American history. It's taken perhaps longer than it should have, but Google is gradually realizing that a fair portion of the public no longer sees it as a cute little Silicon Valley start-up with idealistic stars in its eyes, one that insists "you can make money without doing evil."
Google damaged that trust when it began scanning books without permission, arguing that it was allowed to do so under fair-use laws. Publishers and author groups also harmed that trust when they turned over the key to the castle by bringing the lawsuit as a class action, suddenly making plaintiffs out of millions of authors who did not necessarily appreciate the future value of digital books in 2005, nor authorize the negotiation of the rights to their works."
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30684_3-10321371-265.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)