Google Books Digital Library On Hold…For Now
Google Inc. experienced a roadblock in its desire to create the world’s largest digital library through Google Books when an American federal judge quashed a $125 million “opt-out” settlement. The Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers sued Google in 2005 over a major copyright infringement by digitizing books and placing excerpts of them online but agreed to a settlement that would have established a Book Rights Registry that would offer compensation to copyright holders and provide public access to different books through Google. Judge Denny Chin ruled that the proposed settlement would have given Google an unfair advantage with monopolistic power to use books without the permission of copyright holders. However, he did say that many of the concerns would be dealt with should a revised settlement become “opt-in” whereby only books would be included provided that copyright owners were in agreement and chose to participate in the arrangement.
Critics of the opt-out settlement included Amazon.com Inc. (whose e-reader Kindle would not be compatible with Google’s Library) and Microsoft Corporation. Conversely, Sony Corporation (whose e-reader is compatible with Google’s software) supported the “opt-out” settlement.
The French government had opposed the proposed settlement but came to terms with Google in early 2010 that permitted French-language books to be scanned without giving up copyright control. The German government has opposed the “opt-out” settlement and announced its own “opt-in” alternative with the creation of the German Digital Library .
The Open Book Alliance called for any major book digitization and publishing initiative to be competitive and open. The “opt-in” framework is the preferred way to amend the settlement but anti-trust and privacy issues also need to be addressed. The OBA supports the creation of an open digital library that benefits the public interest and supports creators’ rights within a competitive and innovative milieu.
Sources:
Ashford, Warwick, “Open Book Alliance welcomes court ruling on Google book plan”, Computerweekly.com, March 23, 2011. <http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2011/03/23/246026/Open-Book-Alliance-welcomes-court-ruling-on-Google-book.htm>. Accessed March 23, 2011.
Associated Press, “NYC judge rejects Google books settlement”, Globe and Mail, March 22, 2011. <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/books/nyc-judge-rejects-google-books-settlement/article1951883/>. Accessed March 23, 2011.
Bartz, Diane (Reuters), “Judge rejects Google book deal with authors goes 'too far'; Deal gives company significant competitive advantage”, Montreal Gazette, March 23, 2011. <http://www.montrealgazette.com/technology/Judge+rejects+Google+book+deal+with+authors/4487351/story.html>. Accessed March 23, 2011.
“Berlin plans response to Google Books project”, DW-World.de (Deutsche Welle), December 3, 2009. <http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,4964982,00.html>. Accessed March 23, 2011.
“Google book plan quashed”, Edmonton Journal, March 23, 2011. <http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Google+book+plan+quashed/4488552/story.html>. Accessed March 23, 2011.
Hasselback, Drew, “U.S. judge rejects settlement in Google Books case”, Financial Post, March 22, 2011. <http://business.financialpost.com/2011/03/22/u-s-judge-rejects-settlement-in-google-books-case/>. Accessed March 23, 2011.
Helft, Miguel, “Google library plans shelved”, Sydney Morning Herald, March 24, 2011. <http://www.smh.com.au/business/google-library-plans-shelved-20110323-1c6pm.html>. Accessed March 23, 2011.
Comments