Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Responds to Authors Guild Lawsuit

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the better-than-fight-night dept.

Phoe6 writes "Google has responded to the Authors' Guild lawsuit of "massive copyright infringement". They point out that the Library Project is 'fully consistent with both the fair use doctrine under U.S. copyright law and the principles underlying copyright law itself, which allow everything from parodies to excerpts in book reviews.'"

3 of 383 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Copyright Law by Guysmiley777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Until you've used the Google tool, please don't post on its merits or dangers. From what I've seen using the tool it really looks to be useful for researchers and students. Claiming this is stealing from authors it completely wrong headed. If anything this is a giant electronic library card catalog tool.

    Corporate America of course won't be happy until you pay a per-word usage fee for reading a library book.

    --
    Coding with assembly is like playing with Legos. Coding an application in assembly is like building a car with Legos.
  2. Opt-In makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I can understand some of the angst people are directing at Google, here's the real issue:

    How the hell do you practically determine (let alone contact) the current copyright holder for books that have long been out of print?

    Amazon hasn't faced this problem because they actually sell books. Amazon is only scanning and making searchable those books that it can obtain and sell -- and hence can contact the publisher. It's not an issue of Amazon being "honorable" and Google not.

    Google is going to be rendering searchable books that you can't find on Google, or in Barnes & Noble, but only in your library, or maybe a distant university library. If they had the burden of tracking down who, if anyone, still cares about the book, it would remain lost to you. What Google is doing is simply saying, "if you care about your book, just let us know."

    And then when you contact Google, proving you're actually the copyright holder isn't an onerous "hoop" you have to jump through. Frankly, I'm surprised you're complaining about it. Even the DMCA requires copyright holders to prove they hold the copyright when they issue a takedown notice.

  3. Re:Copyright Law by EggyToast · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Exactly. The use of copyright is a benefit, and a priviledge. The benefit is that an individual can hold the rights to copying the works and being paid for the copies. The priviledge is that it's entirely a legal standing, and can change or be revoked through legal means.

    So "fair use" isn't avoidable -- it's part of the entire package. If you want to use the restrictions of copyright on your works, you need to allow for fair use of your works as well. You can't pick and choose.