RSS Feed (xml)
plans to create what could be the world's largest virtual library.
Writing in the New York Times, Mr Brin said he wanted to "dispel some
myths" surrounding the project. He said the plan would make millions
of "out-of- print" books available to the public online. Those against
the idea fear it would give Google a monopoly over access to the
world's information. "In reality, nothing in this agreement precludes
any other company or organisation from pursuing their own similar
effort," he wrote. "The agreement limits consumer choice in out-of-
print books about as much as it limits consumer choice in unicorns.
"Today, if you want to access a typical out-of- print book, you have
only one choice — fly to one of a handful of leading libraries in the
country and hope to find it in the stacks." 'No deal' Google Books -
formerly known as Google print - was first launched in 2004. It aims
to scan millions of the world's books and make them available - and
searchable - online. However, in 2005 the Authors Guild of America
and Association of American Publishers sued Google over "massive
copyright infringement". Google countered that its project represented
" fair use". " Many of us are objecting because we have been working
together for years on the mass scanning of out-of-print books... and
Google's 'settlement' could hurt our efforts " Brewster Khale,
Internet Archive The search giant settled the lawsuit in 2008. In
that deal, Google agreed to pay $125 m (£76 m) to create a Book
Rights Registry, where authors and publishers could register works
and receive compensation. Authors and publishers would get 70 % from
the sale of these books with Google keeping the remaining 30 %.
Google would also be given the right to digitise orphan works, titles
where the authors cannot be found. There are thought to be around
five million of these works. A decision on whether the deal could go
through was originally scheduled for early October. But, after an
outpouring of criticism - from governments, technology companies,
privacy advocates and consumer watchdogs - as well as formal
objections from the US Department of Justice, the presiding Judge
sent the deal back to the drawing board. "Many of us are objecting
because we have been working together for years on the mass scanning
of out-of-print books - and have worked to get books online for far
longer than Google - and Google's 'settlement' could hurt our
efforts," wrote Brewster Khale of the Internet Archive in a blog
post earlier this week. The Internet Archive has a competing project,
which aims to offer a free digital library. It scans around 1000
books a day. "A major part of our efforts have concentrated on
changing the law so everyone would benefit." On Wednesday, the judge
said the hearing on the reworked settlement would begin on 9
November. 'History lesson' Mr Brin addressed three major criticisms in
his column in the New York Times about the terms of the Book Rights
Registry, the quality of the scans Google would offer and concerns
about competition. Whilst he admitted in the short term Google would
effectively dominate the market, he said ultimately other projects
would benefit from the firm's work. "If Google Books is successful,
others will follow," he wrote. "They will have an easier path: this
agreement creates a books rights registry that will encourage rights
holders to come forward and will provide a convenient way for other
projects to obtain permissions. "While new projects will not
immediately have the same rights to orphan works, the agreement will
be a beacon of compromise in case of a similar lawsuit." He also
argued that the firm was safeguarding the world's cultural heritage.
"The famous library at Alexandria burned three times, in 48 BC, AD
273 and AD 640 , as did the Library of Congress, where a fire in
1851 destroyed two-thirds of the collection," he wrote. "I hope such
destruction never happens again, but history would suggest
otherwise."
