backtop


Print 8 comment(s) - last by tmouse.. on Sep 10 at 7:34 AM

Google may take up slack left by poorly supported European scanning project Europana

Google has been scanning books to make them available online for a while now. The practice has landed Google in hot water with both the government and authors who were not originally approached for permission to scan the works.

Google made a settlement with author groups in the U.S. that allowed it to continue scanning books and make them available online. Regulators in Europe are now eyeing the Google scanning program while Google defends itself by saying that the scanning of books makes finding information online a more democratic process.

The big fear from libraries in the U.S. and abroad is that the digital service offered by Google will quickly become a necessity that will be very expensive. Others fear that Google is setting up a monopoly that will last for a long time as the only company who can scan out of date works of literature.

Google's Dan Clancy said, "We have seen a democratization of access to online information." He continued saying, "You can discover information which you did not know was there. It is important that these (out-of-print) books are not left behind. Google's interest was in helping people to find the books."

Europe has its own online book registrant reports Reuters called Europeana that has scanned works ranging from Shakespeare to pictures of famous personalities from Europe. The catch is that many European nations have been slow to scan works for the online service. EU commissioner Viviane Reding hopes that Google would be able to take up some of the slack for the Europeana service. Reding and fellow commissioner Charlie McCreevy says that they will consider shaking up copyright laws if needed to get works online.

Some authors are now advocating for Google to be able to scan their works. One author who originally sued Google over its scanning practice, James Gerick, said, "The settlement mostly only affects out-of-print books. For us who are authors of out-of-print books, it brings our work to a whole new audience."

In the U.S. the FTC is concerned that Google may make unauthorized use of personal information collected by users of the service to serve ads. The FTC issued a letter to Google asking that it draft a privacy policy for data use.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Democracy?
By clovell on 9/9/2009 10:18:42 AM , Rating: 2
Don't get me wrong - I have no strong feelings about Google, but... How does Democracy have anything to do with the wanton disregard for Intellectual Property and Copyright, much less justify it?




RE: Democracy?
By Moishe on 9/9/2009 3:15:33 PM , Rating: 3
An author who wants their book hidden is stupid because the whole purpose of storing information is so that it can be retrieved.

I think Google is right in what they are doing, but wrong in how they are going about it.

We do need to save the books. All books, everywhere should be digitized. The good thing is that Google has the funding and brains to make it happen. It's sad that people will stand in their way for the stated reasons:

quote:
...fear that Google is setting up a monopoly...

This is stupid. We should not prevent ourselves from moving forward because some company *might* end up with a monopoly. It's a cop out and a poor one at that.

It should be simple. Google is allowed to scan books older than X years at will and make money off of the database. After all, they are the ones that is providing the funds and the risk behind it. The database should be guaranteed to be free and open so that Google doesn't pull a GraceNote in the future.

The copyright holders must have some method of removing their work from the public view if they choose, but they should not be able to force Google to delete the scanned copy entirely. Some day the copyright will run out and Google should not have to re-scan.

For authors who want money, Google could setup a pay version of their site where authors can allow inclusion with royalties.


RE: Democracy?
By BottledBob on 9/9/2009 6:32:12 PM , Rating: 2
Intellectual Property? It's a published book. Its sole purpose is to share information with others. Google's plan will drastically increase its exposure, and make it easier to access.

And if we ever want E-readers to succeed (no paper = save the planet), we're going to need the content to put on them. And preferrably as cheap as possible. Google has the resources to make this happen.


RE: Democracy?
By croc on 9/9/2009 7:39:14 PM , Rating: 2
...But it's MY book. Not Google's book. Every 'free' download of MY book is bickies not in MY pocket. What gives google the right to put MY book onto its 'library'? Oh... It's 'out of print' in the US. Well MY book is not out of print in Australia, still has a valid copyright, and we DO have a trade agreement that covers, among other things, copyright. And once MY book is scanned into google's library, it's a bit late isn't it?

To much of the rest of the world this looks like a blatent theft of IP rights by google, aided and abetted by the US gov't. Hey, google... 'Do no evil'... Remember that? Or was that not a 'core' corporate philosophy.


RE: Democracy?
By BottledBob on 9/9/2009 8:28:35 PM , Rating: 2
You might as well ban libraries from letting people borrow your book, because its YOURS and not the library's. Theoretically your book can be in infinite circulation and you've only made $10 (not even that considering publishing etc) Why not let EVERYONE have a copy of your book for free, and still make 5c a pop? (the revenue from a Google ad next to the "download" button).

Then if i want a book I can get it instantly, instead of going to a public library, requesting it and waiting 2 months for it to arrive, then repeating for book 2, 3, and 4.

This would also allow remote areas to have the same access to books as the big city kids.


RE: Democracy?
By tmouse on 9/10/2009 7:34:32 AM , Rating: 3
I'm sorry but that is a completely foolish comparison. As you stated IF you want a book for free from the library then you HAVE to be willing to wait for it else you're going to BUY it. Now if you can get it for FREE on demand what pray tell is the motivation for ANYONE to EVER buy one?. As long as a book is copyrighted it should be the holders right to control its availability not mega corp. Nor should they have ANY say in the amount a copyright holder gets. If the person wants $10 a pop what right do you have to say they should only get 5c? If it's no longer copyrighted than I agree it should be available and in a program like this. I would also agree that all books should be available for purchase in e-form, but there is no "right" for everyone to get a free copy on demand. In one sense libraries are a form of advertising, like radio, BUT here is the catch access is LIMITED to availability. THATS what drives the motivation for sales; take that away the whole market falls apart. People do not pay for things because "it the right thing to do".


How Funny..
By krichmond on 9/9/09, Rating: 0
RE: How Funny..
By invidious on 9/9/2009 9:23:57 AM , Rating: 3
Most people are asleep at 6am, not up reading DT.


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki