Library Groups Ask DOJ To Oversee Google Books

adeelarshad82 writes "Three library associations have asked the Justice Department to oversee Google's plans to create a massive digital library, so as to prevent excessively high pricing for institutional subscriptions. They said that there was unlikely to be an effective competitor to Google's massive project in the near term. They also asked for academic author representation on the Registry board. Google's plan to digitize millions of books has been criticized by a variety of sources and has recently been shut down in France."

Comments

Why do I get

[OverlordQ]

Why do I get the feeling that if it came down to it, it would be these library associations who would be charging large amounts of money to access their archives rather then Google.

Re:Why do I get

[Ethanol-fueled]

You're right. This isn't about fair prices for consumers, it's about control. Why should I have to pay just to read a paper which was funded with my tax dollars?

They probably think that people will use Google to "steal" what should be in the public domain to begin with. They think that it will ruin their business, just like how the internet "ruined" the newspaper business.

Re:Why do I get

[lorenlal]

I don't think so. I mean, most libraries exist to provide free or low cost access to as much of this information as they can.

I wonder if the library association is interested in this because they worry about their own existence?

Personally, I don't think this is a terrible idea. I mean, many of us don't doubt Google's intentions... But I like this sort of mindset when someone has a de facto monopoly. I'd rather err on the side of suspicion and actually put emphasis protecting competitors.

Re:Why do I get

[spikenerd]

Well said. The public pays the taxes that support all of the government necessary to enable Copyright. The public, therefore, rightfully owns those works after a limited time. By extending Copyright, they effectively robbed all of us of our rightful property. What hypocrisy for them to crack down on "piracy".

Re:Why do I get

[Korin43]

But in this case they will have a monopoly simply because no one else has bothered to do what they're planning to do. Why should they be punished for being the only ones who want to digitize everything? I read constantly about how horrible it will be that Google will be the only ones doing this, but if people actually thought competition would help, there would already be a competitor.

Re:Why do I get

[DarkofPeace]

I agree, by the logic everyone is using, no one should do anything new because they would have a monopoly until someone copied them. The whole point is that Google is trying something no one else has bothered to do, and anyone who wants to put the money and effort can duplicate. The problem is having to drag the old school kicking and screaming into the new millennium.

Re:Why do I get

[Trepidity]

That's certainly the precedent set by JSTOR, a more traditional non-profit initiative with closer ties to libraries. An individual not affiliated with a subscribing institution basically can't get access, outside a few narrow exceptions (like access to a specific journal if you're an individual subscriber to the paper version of the journal). They won't even allow public access to old journals that are in the public domain! Google so far is being much more public-friendly.

Re:Why do I get

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you are wrong, but your idealistic notion is a good one.

Libraries are there to provide books that people want to read. Often they throw out books, some that are really good to read, but not popular. What Google is doing is valuable for those who want to have access to the books their library does not / will not / can not carry.

I think that the ideal library has all books... old and new. Realistically that is not possible. There are inter-library loans and such for books with some libraries, but finding those books can be difficult as well.

Libraries should be rejoicing that something like this can happen!

Good Grief.

[Frosty Piss]

Maybe Google should take their ball and go home. They *are not* required to digitize millions of book for they general perusal of mankind, if they don't want to. Let these selfish "library groups" wallow in the absence of Google Books.

Re:Good Grief.

[Anonymous Coward]

Google has a sweetheart deal that no one else on the planet can get. They worked the writers guild and court system in such a way as to give themselves the rights to all this material in one swoop. Anyone who wants to compete with them would be required to find / negotiate with each copyright holder to get them to give them access. This is a major barrier to any competition.

Re:Good Grief.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or point out the deal Google got and claim that THAT's where the monopoly lies, and thus get the same thing [or something similar] for themselves? We now have precedent for what has to happen to get access to all the works like this and what one can do with the digitized results. Why can't another company strike the same deal [or something reasonably similar] and then do all the work Google's doing? Did Google's deal really say "And this shall be the only deal of its kind ever in the history of the Universe. Should anyone besides Google wish to do this, they shall have to personally call every single person on the planet and negotiate royalties"?

Re:Good Grief.

[lwsimon]

And their self-interested motives make their actions less beneficial how?

Re:Good Grief.

[JohnFluxx]

I think you're missing how beautifully google did this.

Google started scanning books, somewhat illegally. A _class action_ suit was then filed against google, by _some_ book writers but on behalf of _all_ book writers. This is the key point here. The purpose of a class action lawsuit is that you don't tie up the courts for years while every single person individually sues some company for something that they did wrong. Instead you have one big lawsuit and, and here's the kicker, no more lawsuits are allowed after that.

So, google gets sued in this class action lawsuit, and comes to an agreement that they can scan the books. Again, the class action lawsuit is speaking on behalf of _every_ person that ever has or will write a book. Think about that for a moment.

Say that you now write a book, and Google and some other company scan that book. You wrote this independently and have nothing to do with any guild or anything. You _cannot_ sue Google, but you _can_ sue the other company. This is the wonderful situation that Google is now in.

This is the strangeness of the situation. For another company to do the same thing, they would have to do something established as illegal, then try to entice a class action lawsuit, then try to come to the same arrangement. It's pretty risky!

Re:Wait just a minute here

[Daniel Dvorkin]

The DoJ is already in their business, by virtue of the settlement. What the librarians are trying to do is limit the damage which this in-their-business-ness may do. It's not analagous at all to someone who bitches about the cops but then calls 911 at the first sign of trouble. It's more like someone who was once tasered for asking an officer why he was getting a speeding ticket trying to figure out, the next time he gets pulled over, what he can do to avoid it happening again.

Competition is easy

[Gothmolly]

Just don't use their service. Everyone survived w/o it before, so its clearly not something you must have. If you decide to use it, STFU about the price.

Next ?