David Reid, BBC News; Europe split on Google book plans:
Google plans to put millions of the world's books online and create the world's largest virtual library by 2010.
"The European Union has its own project to digitise library collections which was first mooted as a counter to Google.
The Europeana project aims to keep art, culture and out-of-print books free from commercial control.
Not everyone is opposed to Google's plans - some libraries view the firm's commercial ambitions as a chance to get their collections digitised for free.
Patrick Bazin, director of the library in the French city of Lyon, explained that if libraries do not digitize their collections, they run the risk of disappearing from the cultural landscape.
He added that Google's investment could be used to his library's advantage.
"Our aim is not to supply a private company with digital versions of our books, but to have digital versions so we can build a digital library.
"We estimated that to digitise the 500,000 books we are going to would cost us 60m euros. We don't have 60m euros," he explained."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/8357773.stm
Showing posts with label out-of-print books. Show all posts
Showing posts with label out-of-print books. Show all posts
Friday, November 13, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Europe Seeks to Ease Rules for Putting Books Online ; New York Times, 8/28/09
James Kanter via New York Times; Europe Seeks to Ease Rules for Putting Books Online:
"The European Commission on Friday will propose drafting rules that would make it easier to put many books and manuscripts online. The move is a part of the commission’s effort to bolster access to information and to encourage online businesses.
The changes would be aimed at allowing Internet users to access out-of-print works and so-called orphan works for which it is impossible or very difficult to trace the rights holders, said Viviane Reding, the European Union commissioner who oversees the Internet.
Any new rules eventually proposed by Ms. Reding could also make it easier to acquire a single digital copyright covering the European Union, rather than having to deal with agencies in each of its member states....
Ms. Reding is stepping up her campaign to modify the European Union’s copyright rules to suit a new era and to enable citizens to locate content on public sites like Europeana, a digital library of Europe’s cultural heritage, as well as on private sites.
A hearing will be held next month in Brussels on Google’s efforts to digitize major collections of books and the company’s proposed settlement with book publishers in the United States.
Ms. Reding said Europeans should “look very closely at the discussions in the U.S. to see how the experience made there could best be used for finding a European solution.”
On Thursday, European officials highlighted the role that private companies like Google could play in helping financially struggling public authorities carry out the expensive task of digitizing materials like books.
Ms. Reding’s suggestions — which are open to public comment until mid-November — broadly mirror aspects of United States copyright law and echo the proposed Google settlement by creating a central registry for the works."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/28/technology/internet/28books.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=europe%20books&st=cse
"The European Commission on Friday will propose drafting rules that would make it easier to put many books and manuscripts online. The move is a part of the commission’s effort to bolster access to information and to encourage online businesses.
The changes would be aimed at allowing Internet users to access out-of-print works and so-called orphan works for which it is impossible or very difficult to trace the rights holders, said Viviane Reding, the European Union commissioner who oversees the Internet.
Any new rules eventually proposed by Ms. Reding could also make it easier to acquire a single digital copyright covering the European Union, rather than having to deal with agencies in each of its member states....
Ms. Reding is stepping up her campaign to modify the European Union’s copyright rules to suit a new era and to enable citizens to locate content on public sites like Europeana, a digital library of Europe’s cultural heritage, as well as on private sites.
A hearing will be held next month in Brussels on Google’s efforts to digitize major collections of books and the company’s proposed settlement with book publishers in the United States.
Ms. Reding said Europeans should “look very closely at the discussions in the U.S. to see how the experience made there could best be used for finding a European solution.”
On Thursday, European officials highlighted the role that private companies like Google could play in helping financially struggling public authorities carry out the expensive task of digitizing materials like books.
Ms. Reding’s suggestions — which are open to public comment until mid-November — broadly mirror aspects of United States copyright law and echo the proposed Google settlement by creating a central registry for the works."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/28/technology/internet/28books.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=europe%20books&st=cse
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Lawyer and Author Adds His Objections to Settling the Google Book Lawsuit; New York Times, 8/19/09
Miguel Helft and Motoko Rich via New York Times; Lawyer and Author Adds His Objections to Settling the Google Book Lawsuit:
"In the latest objection, Scott E. Gant, an author and partner at Boies Schiller & Flexner, a prominent Washington law firm, plans to file a sweeping opposition to the settlement on Wednesday urging the court to reject it.
“This is a predominantly commercial transaction and one that should be undertaken through the normal commercial process, which is negotiation and informed consent,” Mr. Gant said in an interview. Google and its partners are “trying to ram this through so that millions of copyright holders will have no idea that this is happening.”
Unlike most previous objections to the project, which focused on policy issues and recommended modifications to the settlement, Mr. Gant argues that the agreement, which gives Google commercial rights to millions of books without having to negotiate for them individually, amounts to an abuse of the class-action process. He also contends that it does not sufficiently compensate authors and does not adequately notify and represent all the authors affected.
Legal experts, who had not seen the filing but heard a description of it, said it could be the most direct attack on the agreement so far.
“It may be the most fundamental challenge to the settlement yet,” said James Grimmelmann, an associate professor at the Institute for Information Law and Policy at New York Law School, a critic of the agreement whose blog tracks filings and commentary related to it...
“I opted out of the settlement just on ornery grounds,” said Christopher Buckley, author of “Thank You for Smoking” and “Losing Mum and Pup,” a memoir. He said he was suspicious of the claims by Google and the Authors Guild that the settlement would help breathe new life into out-of-print works. “I think books either stay in print or don’t pretty much on their own,” he said.
He said he was skeptical that the agreement was increasing the public good. “Whenever I hear capitalism proclaiming noble motives,” he said, “something makes me check my wallet.” "
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/technology/internet/19google.html
"In the latest objection, Scott E. Gant, an author and partner at Boies Schiller & Flexner, a prominent Washington law firm, plans to file a sweeping opposition to the settlement on Wednesday urging the court to reject it.
“This is a predominantly commercial transaction and one that should be undertaken through the normal commercial process, which is negotiation and informed consent,” Mr. Gant said in an interview. Google and its partners are “trying to ram this through so that millions of copyright holders will have no idea that this is happening.”
Unlike most previous objections to the project, which focused on policy issues and recommended modifications to the settlement, Mr. Gant argues that the agreement, which gives Google commercial rights to millions of books without having to negotiate for them individually, amounts to an abuse of the class-action process. He also contends that it does not sufficiently compensate authors and does not adequately notify and represent all the authors affected.
Legal experts, who had not seen the filing but heard a description of it, said it could be the most direct attack on the agreement so far.
“It may be the most fundamental challenge to the settlement yet,” said James Grimmelmann, an associate professor at the Institute for Information Law and Policy at New York Law School, a critic of the agreement whose blog tracks filings and commentary related to it...
“I opted out of the settlement just on ornery grounds,” said Christopher Buckley, author of “Thank You for Smoking” and “Losing Mum and Pup,” a memoir. He said he was suspicious of the claims by Google and the Authors Guild that the settlement would help breathe new life into out-of-print works. “I think books either stay in print or don’t pretty much on their own,” he said.
He said he was skeptical that the agreement was increasing the public good. “Whenever I hear capitalism proclaiming noble motives,” he said, “something makes me check my wallet.” "
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/technology/internet/19google.html
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Google Books causes concern; Boston Globe, 7/24/09
D.C. Denison via Boston Globe; Google Books causes concern: Digital library’s growth has some worried it may be building a monopoly:
"Dan Clancy makes librarians nervous.
When the Google Books engineering director participated in a panel discussion at the Boston Public Library this week, his opening remarks focused on the search engine’s efforts to enable access for “every kid in Arkansas’’ to Harvard-size digital libraries. But soon afterward, he was hearing from librarians on the panel that they felt “queasy’’ about Google Books...
“Google is creating a mega bookstore the likes of which we have never seen,’’ said the panel organizer Maura Marx, executive director of Open Knowledge Commons, a Boston nonprofit organization. “People are very uncomfortable with the idea that one corporation has so much power over such a large collection of knowledge.’’
A growing concern, which was raised during the library panel, is that Google will end up with monopolistic control of access to millions of scanned digital books. This concern was heightened when Google negotiated a settlement with the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers, groups that represent authors and publishers, after they sued Google to stop the search company from digitizing books."
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2009/07/24/google_books_causes_concern_among_librarians_authors/
"Dan Clancy makes librarians nervous.
When the Google Books engineering director participated in a panel discussion at the Boston Public Library this week, his opening remarks focused on the search engine’s efforts to enable access for “every kid in Arkansas’’ to Harvard-size digital libraries. But soon afterward, he was hearing from librarians on the panel that they felt “queasy’’ about Google Books...
“Google is creating a mega bookstore the likes of which we have never seen,’’ said the panel organizer Maura Marx, executive director of Open Knowledge Commons, a Boston nonprofit organization. “People are very uncomfortable with the idea that one corporation has so much power over such a large collection of knowledge.’’
A growing concern, which was raised during the library panel, is that Google will end up with monopolistic control of access to millions of scanned digital books. This concern was heightened when Google negotiated a settlement with the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers, groups that represent authors and publishers, after they sued Google to stop the search company from digitizing books."
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2009/07/24/google_books_causes_concern_among_librarians_authors/
Saturday, January 17, 2009
From Siva Vaidhyanathan "My initial take on the Google-publishers settlement", Siva Vaidhyanathan's Blog, The Googlization of Everything, 10/28/08
From Siva Vaidhyanathan, Via Siva Vaidhyanathan's Blog, The Googlization of Everything: "My initial take on the Google-publishers settlement":
"My major criticisms of Google Book Seach have always concerned the actions of the university libraries that have participated in this program rather than Google itself. Companies should always do what is best for them. But the university libraries have a different, much higher mission. And they have clear ethical obligations. So I now turn to them.
From the beginning, this has seemed to be a major example of corporate welfare. Libraries at public universities all over this country (including the one that employs me) have spent many billions of dollars collecting these books. Now they are just giving away access to one company that is cornering the market on on-line access. They did this without concern for user confidentiality, preservation, image quality, search prowess, metadata standards, or long-term sustainability...
At the core of this settlement is this fact that university libraries much confront: For the first time, elements of library collections will be offered for sale in widespread manner via a private contractor. Perhaps this is only a shift of degree. Perhaps it is a major mission shift. It's worth a good argument, no?
Ultimately, I have to ask: Is this really the best possible system for the universal spread of knowledge? I think we can do better. Watch this space to see how."
http://www.googlizationofeverything.com/2008/10/my_initial_take_on_the_googlep.php
"My major criticisms of Google Book Seach have always concerned the actions of the university libraries that have participated in this program rather than Google itself. Companies should always do what is best for them. But the university libraries have a different, much higher mission. And they have clear ethical obligations. So I now turn to them.
From the beginning, this has seemed to be a major example of corporate welfare. Libraries at public universities all over this country (including the one that employs me) have spent many billions of dollars collecting these books. Now they are just giving away access to one company that is cornering the market on on-line access. They did this without concern for user confidentiality, preservation, image quality, search prowess, metadata standards, or long-term sustainability...
At the core of this settlement is this fact that university libraries much confront: For the first time, elements of library collections will be offered for sale in widespread manner via a private contractor. Perhaps this is only a shift of degree. Perhaps it is a major mission shift. It's worth a good argument, no?
Ultimately, I have to ask: Is this really the best possible system for the universal spread of knowledge? I think we can do better. Watch this space to see how."
http://www.googlizationofeverything.com/2008/10/my_initial_take_on_the_googlep.php
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Op-Ed: How to Publish Without Perishing, New York Times, 11/29/08
Op-Ed by James Gleick, via New York Times: How to Publish Without Perishing:
"Which brings us to the settlement agreement, pending court approval, in the class action suit Authors Guild v. Google. The suit was filed in September 2005 when Google embarked on an audacious program of copying onto its servers every book it could get its hands on...On its face this looked like a brazen assault on copyright, but Google argued that it should be protected as a new kind of “fair use” and went on scanning during two and a half years of secret negotiations (I was involved on the authors’ side)...
As a way through the impasse, the authors persuaded Google to do more than just scan the books for purposes of searching, but go further, by bringing them back to commercial life. Under the agreement these millions of out-of-print books return from limbo. Any money made from advertising or licensing fees will go partly to Google and mostly to the rights-holders. The agreement is nonexclusive: If competitors to Google want to get into the business, they can.
This means a new beginning — a vast trove of books restored to the marketplace. It also means that much of the book world is being upended before our eyes: the business of publishing, selling and distributing books; the role of libraries and bookstores; all uses of books for research, consultation, information storage; everything, in fact, but the plain act of reading a book from start to finish."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/30/opinion/30gleick.html
"Which brings us to the settlement agreement, pending court approval, in the class action suit Authors Guild v. Google. The suit was filed in September 2005 when Google embarked on an audacious program of copying onto its servers every book it could get its hands on...On its face this looked like a brazen assault on copyright, but Google argued that it should be protected as a new kind of “fair use” and went on scanning during two and a half years of secret negotiations (I was involved on the authors’ side)...
As a way through the impasse, the authors persuaded Google to do more than just scan the books for purposes of searching, but go further, by bringing them back to commercial life. Under the agreement these millions of out-of-print books return from limbo. Any money made from advertising or licensing fees will go partly to Google and mostly to the rights-holders. The agreement is nonexclusive: If competitors to Google want to get into the business, they can.
This means a new beginning — a vast trove of books restored to the marketplace. It also means that much of the book world is being upended before our eyes: the business of publishing, selling and distributing books; the role of libraries and bookstores; all uses of books for research, consultation, information storage; everything, in fact, but the plain act of reading a book from start to finish."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/30/opinion/30gleick.html
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Google Settles Suit Over Book-Scanning - New York Times, 10/29/08
Via New York Times: Google Settles Suit Over Book-Scanning:
"Settling a legal battle, Google reached an agreement with book publishers and authors that clears the way for both sides to more easily profit from digital versions of printed books.
The agreement, under which Google would pay $125 million to settle two copyright lawsuits over its book-scanning efforts, would allow it to make millions of out-of-print books available for reading and purchasing online.
It outlines the framework for a new system that will channel payments from book sales, advertising revenue and other fees to authors and publishers, with Google collecting a cut.
The deal goes some way toward drawing a road map for a possible digital future for publishers and authors, who worried that they were losing control over how their works were used online, as the music industry has."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/technology/internet/29google.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=google&st=cse&oref=slogin
"Settling a legal battle, Google reached an agreement with book publishers and authors that clears the way for both sides to more easily profit from digital versions of printed books.
The agreement, under which Google would pay $125 million to settle two copyright lawsuits over its book-scanning efforts, would allow it to make millions of out-of-print books available for reading and purchasing online.
It outlines the framework for a new system that will channel payments from book sales, advertising revenue and other fees to authors and publishers, with Google collecting a cut.
The deal goes some way toward drawing a road map for a possible digital future for publishers and authors, who worried that they were losing control over how their works were used online, as the music industry has."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/technology/internet/29google.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=google&st=cse&oref=slogin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)