Amazon, MS, and Yahoo Against Google's Library

anonymousNR writes "From the BBC, 'Three technology heavyweights are joining a coalition to fight Google's attempt to create what could be the world's largest virtual library. Amazon, Microsoft and Yahoo will sign up to the Open Book Alliance being spearheaded by the Internet Archive. They oppose a legal settlement that could make Google the main source for many online works. "Google is trying to monopolise the library system," the Internet Archive's founder Brewster Kahle said.'"

Comments

This is not about competing to provide books

[symbolset]

It's about depriving us of access to out of print books. That is all.

Re:This is not about competing to provide books

[Brian Gordon]

This. If Amazon had any intention of selling these books, they'd be selling these books! They just don't like that Google is getting a slice of their market.

Re:This is not about competing to provide books

[KliX]

We have no access to out of print books. That's kinda the point.

Re:This is not about competing to provide books

[symbolset]

No, they're not trying to prevent Google from having the sole right. They're trying to prevent Google from having any right. That's evil.

I have concerns about the risk of Google having too much power too. A motto only goes so far. But from where I sit they didn't get the market dynamic they have from buying up ideas and forcing people out of business with dirty tricks like some of these. They get their markets by competing and giving better service - doing what they do very well. That might be an advantage, but I have trouble coloring it an unfair advantage. Others have the chance after all to step up their game if they're able.

Re:Open X Alliance

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I'm fairly sure that the Internet Archive is a nonprofit.

Yep. Ironically Kahle started it the same year Larry Page started the research project which became google.

But, even if it is a non-profit that doesn't mean MS/Yahoo/Amazon aren't supporting it for their own reasons. I just hope Kahle is shrewed enough to milk as much support out of these new-found 'friends' as he can without giving away the cow.

Google's initiative is remarkably one-sided. But a lot of the opposition seems to be from 'old-media' types who want to keep things locked up in dead trees and paywalls rather than a solution that opens up as much information to as many people as possible. Kahle's got the opportunity to do not just the right thing, but the best thing, I hope he can get away with it.

Re:A genuine question

[QuantumG]

If Google decides that they don't want you reading some book for whatever reason, then you're shit out of luck unless you've got a hard copy of it.

So.. kinda like if Google did nothing?

Re:Some has to do it

[martin-boundary]

Perhaps you're unaware of the money and energy invested by the Internet Archive, or the scanning projects by Google's competitors and single university libraries?

Not that investing money and energy implies quality. Google's scanned books are very low quality, as a matter of fact. If you'd like to see good quality scans, try pointing your browser at the Center for Retrospective Digitization of Goettingen University for example.

The problem though isn't money or energy for scanning, there's plenty of that around. The problem is legal, as in Google have an exclusive agreement with the American Author's Guild, so others are not allowed to play. That's the problem here.

Maybe you believe in capitalism? In that case, don't forget that every time some one company has an exclusive right to exploit a resource, it inevitably leads to low quality, expensive junk passed off as gold.