Google Print - trouble ahead?
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Chris Phillips
Google Print - trouble ahead?
Not surprisingly, publishers are concerned about Google's plans to digitise
copyright volumes in a number of academic libraries, announced last
December.
The Association of American University Presses has written to Google asking
for clarification of a number of questions, including Google's basic claim
that it will be able to justify making digital copies of entire libraries as
"fair use". A copy of the letter is available on the Association's website:
http://aaupnet.org/aboutup/issues/0865_001.pdf
It's interesting that the letter mentions that Google has a patent
application pending on a pay-per-view system. According to the initial press
release, Google planned to make the text of older volumes, not protected by
copyright, freely available through its website. But if Google is going down
the pay-per-view route, this enormous body of older material could be an
obvious saleable commodity.
Here's a news article from last December about Google's patent application:
http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/3446211
Chris Phillips
copyright volumes in a number of academic libraries, announced last
December.
The Association of American University Presses has written to Google asking
for clarification of a number of questions, including Google's basic claim
that it will be able to justify making digital copies of entire libraries as
"fair use". A copy of the letter is available on the Association's website:
http://aaupnet.org/aboutup/issues/0865_001.pdf
It's interesting that the letter mentions that Google has a patent
application pending on a pay-per-view system. According to the initial press
release, Google planned to make the text of older volumes, not protected by
copyright, freely available through its website. But if Google is going down
the pay-per-view route, this enormous body of older material could be an
obvious saleable commodity.
Here's a news article from last December about Google's patent application:
http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/3446211
Chris Phillips
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: Google Print - trouble ahead?
In message of 25 May, "Chris Phillips" <cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk> wrote:
Many thanks for posting this.
I had originally understood that the Google founders were setting up a
charity to copy _out-of_copyright_ volumes. This would hit those firms
that are currently making copies but do not have a charity to pay for
the cost of doing so. But it had the advantage that Google would
possibly also copy those volumes that were never otherwise to be copied
as the forecast sales would not cover costs.
But now it seems that the project is part of, or associated with, a
wider commercial one to demolish existing publishing houses.
Google might just become no longer my friend.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
Not surprisingly, publishers are concerned about Google's plans to digitise
copyright volumes in a number of academic libraries, announced last
December.
The Association of American University Presses has written to Google asking
for clarification of a number of questions, including Google's basic claim
that it will be able to justify making digital copies of entire libraries as
"fair use". A copy of the letter is available on the Association's website:
http://aaupnet.org/aboutup/issues/0865_001.pdf
It's interesting that the letter mentions that Google has a patent
application pending on a pay-per-view system. According to the initial press
release, Google planned to make the text of older volumes, not protected by
copyright, freely available through its website. But if Google is going down
the pay-per-view route, this enormous body of older material could be an
obvious saleable commodity.
Here's a news article from last December about Google's patent application:
http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/3446211
Many thanks for posting this.
I had originally understood that the Google founders were setting up a
charity to copy _out-of_copyright_ volumes. This would hit those firms
that are currently making copies but do not have a charity to pay for
the cost of doing so. But it had the advantage that Google would
possibly also copy those volumes that were never otherwise to be copied
as the forecast sales would not cover costs.
But now it seems that the project is part of, or associated with, a
wider commercial one to demolish existing publishing houses.
Google might just become no longer my friend.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Chris Phillips
Re: Google Print - trouble ahead?
Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
I don't think the scheme was ever conceived to be a charitable one, but on
the other hand it wasn't clear how Google would be able to make money out of
it, as originally described. I doubt whether it's quite as Machiavellian as
a project to demolish publishing houses, but it sounds as though Google is
pushing the legal limits, and in doing so has put some publishers' noses
badly out of joint.
The odd thing is that Google Print in its initial phase was a scheme for
searching new books, done in partnership with the publishers. It seems that
Google kept its partners completely in the dark while it negotiated to scan
all these millions of library books.
It may be that the publishers are essentially trying to safeguard themselves
against future damaging commercial exploitation of Google's scans of their
books, and/or trying to get some money out of Google and the libraries. The
danger would be that the uncontroversial part of the project covering
out-of-copyright books could be put in doubt if the rest of it gets tied up
in legal and financial knots.
Chris Phillips
I had originally understood that the Google founders were setting up a
charity to copy _out-of_copyright_ volumes. This would hit those firms
that are currently making copies but do not have a charity to pay for
the cost of doing so. But it had the advantage that Google would
possibly also copy those volumes that were never otherwise to be copied
as the forecast sales would not cover costs.
But now it seems that the project is part of, or associated with, a
wider commercial one to demolish existing publishing houses.
Google might just become no longer my friend.
I don't think the scheme was ever conceived to be a charitable one, but on
the other hand it wasn't clear how Google would be able to make money out of
it, as originally described. I doubt whether it's quite as Machiavellian as
a project to demolish publishing houses, but it sounds as though Google is
pushing the legal limits, and in doing so has put some publishers' noses
badly out of joint.
The odd thing is that Google Print in its initial phase was a scheme for
searching new books, done in partnership with the publishers. It seems that
Google kept its partners completely in the dark while it negotiated to scan
all these millions of library books.
It may be that the publishers are essentially trying to safeguard themselves
against future damaging commercial exploitation of Google's scans of their
books, and/or trying to get some money out of Google and the libraries. The
danger would be that the uncontroversial part of the project covering
out-of-copyright books could be put in doubt if the rest of it gets tied up
in legal and financial knots.
Chris Phillips
-
Gjest
Re: Google Print - trouble ahead?
In message of 25 May, "Chris Phillips" <cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk> wrote:
Tim replied;
Many thanks for posting this.
I had originally understood that the Google founders were setting up a
charity to copy _out-of_copyright_ volumes. This would hit those firms
that are currently making copies but do not have a charity to pay for
the cost of doing so. But it had the advantage that Google would
possibly also copy those volumes that were never otherwise to be copied
as the forecast sales would not cover costs.
But now it seems that the project is part of, or associated with, a
wider commercial one to demolish existing publishing houses.
Google might just become no longer my friend.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: _http://powys.org_ (http://powys.org)
<<<<<<
On an interview on BBC Radio 4 this morning, it sounded as though it was The
Association of American University were kicking up a fuss because their
libraries may be at risk. Googol said they were in communication with publishers
and would only allow very limited details of those books whose publishers
objected (e.g. fair use), but AAU stated that Googol would be in breach of
copyright just by holding a digitised form of a copyright book and also predicted
that once scanned, editions would end up on the web, much the same way as
pirated music does now
Adrian
Not surprisingly, publishers are concerned about Google's plans to digitise
copyright volumes in a number of academic libraries, announced last
December.
The Association of American University Presses has written to Google asking
for clarification of a number of questions, including Google's basic claim
that it will be able to justify making digital copies of entire libraries
as
"fair use". A copy of the letter is available on the Association's website:
http://aaupnet.org/aboutup/issues/0865_001.pdf
It's interesting that the letter mentions that Google has a patent
application pending on a pay-per-view system. According to the initial
press
release, Google planned to make the text of older volumes, not protected by
copyright, freely available through its website. But if Google is going
down
the pay-per-view route, this enormous body of older material could be an
obvious saleable commodity.
Here's a news article from last December about Google's patent application:
_http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/3446211_
(http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/3446211)
Tim replied;
Many thanks for posting this.
I had originally understood that the Google founders were setting up a
charity to copy _out-of_copyright_ volumes. This would hit those firms
that are currently making copies but do not have a charity to pay for
the cost of doing so. But it had the advantage that Google would
possibly also copy those volumes that were never otherwise to be copied
as the forecast sales would not cover costs.
But now it seems that the project is part of, or associated with, a
wider commercial one to demolish existing publishing houses.
Google might just become no longer my friend.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: _http://powys.org_ (http://powys.org)
<<<<<<
On an interview on BBC Radio 4 this morning, it sounded as though it was The
Association of American University were kicking up a fuss because their
libraries may be at risk. Googol said they were in communication with publishers
and would only allow very limited details of those books whose publishers
objected (e.g. fair use), but AAU stated that Googol would be in breach of
copyright just by holding a digitised form of a copyright book and also predicted
that once scanned, editions would end up on the web, much the same way as
pirated music does now
Adrian
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: Google Print - trouble ahead?
In message of 25 May, "Chris Phillips" <cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk> wrote:
My sometimes useless memory definitely sees some headlines saying that
the founders were going to sponsor this charity out of the funds from
the recent flotation of Google, which netted them some billions in cash
from the shares they sold for the flotation.
It all seemed very worthwhile, apart from putting sundry small firms
out of business. I remember commenting on the latter and receiving
back comments to the effect of "It's business", so I shut up!
Personally I have a lot of sympathy with the publishers. But it is all
in line with the old USA independence and which, certainly until 1900 or
perhaps later, hardly recognised any foreign copyright at all. Hence,
again IIRC (though only memories of what I read of others reporting,
not of the events themselves, I'm hardly that old), some excitement when
scribes were found furiously copying down libretto and scores (or the
other way round?) at first nights of newly popular Gilbert and Sullivan
operas.
A bit like the old pop-tune swapping thing. Napster, was it? And it
certainly took some millions of lawyers fees to put a stop to that.
Legal action is only for the seriously rich.
I do hope they copy some of the more useful-to-us old volumes. But our
problem is that it is really the old manuscripts that need copying and
I simply cannot read those. And there is no doubt that the older,
out-of-copyright, books on those manuscripts are not as reliable as
later ones; scholarship pays, particularly in the light of the greater
number of manuscripts known these days. So the best scholarship is in
the more recent books (and CP, etc corrigenda web-sites, of course) and
those are not out_of_copyright. So we may never benefit from from that
Google project.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
I had originally understood that the Google founders were setting up a
charity to copy _out-of_copyright_ volumes. This would hit those firms
that are currently making copies but do not have a charity to pay for
the cost of doing so. But it had the advantage that Google would
possibly also copy those volumes that were never otherwise to be copied
as the forecast sales would not cover costs.
But now it seems that the project is part of, or associated with, a
wider commercial one to demolish existing publishing houses.
Google might just become no longer my friend.
I don't think the scheme was ever conceived to be a charitable one,
but on the other hand it wasn't clear how Google would be able to
make money out of it, as originally described.
My sometimes useless memory definitely sees some headlines saying that
the founders were going to sponsor this charity out of the funds from
the recent flotation of Google, which netted them some billions in cash
from the shares they sold for the flotation.
It all seemed very worthwhile, apart from putting sundry small firms
out of business. I remember commenting on the latter and receiving
back comments to the effect of "It's business", so I shut up!
I doubt whether it's quite as Machiavellian as a project to demolish
publishing houses, but it sounds as though Google is pushing the legal
limits, and in doing so has put some publishers' noses badly out of
joint.
Personally I have a lot of sympathy with the publishers. But it is all
in line with the old USA independence and which, certainly until 1900 or
perhaps later, hardly recognised any foreign copyright at all. Hence,
again IIRC (though only memories of what I read of others reporting,
not of the events themselves, I'm hardly that old), some excitement when
scribes were found furiously copying down libretto and scores (or the
other way round?) at first nights of newly popular Gilbert and Sullivan
operas.
The odd thing is that Google Print in its initial phase was a scheme
for searching new books, done in partnership with the publishers. It
seems that Google kept its partners completely in the dark while it
negotiated to scan all these millions of library books.
A bit like the old pop-tune swapping thing. Napster, was it? And it
certainly took some millions of lawyers fees to put a stop to that.
Legal action is only for the seriously rich.
It may be that the publishers are essentially trying to safeguard
themselves against future damaging commercial exploitation of
Google's scans of their books, and/or trying to get some money out of
Google and the libraries. The danger would be that the
uncontroversial part of the project covering out-of-copyright books
could be put in doubt if the rest of it gets tied up in legal and
financial knots.
I do hope they copy some of the more useful-to-us old volumes. But our
problem is that it is really the old manuscripts that need copying and
I simply cannot read those. And there is no doubt that the older,
out-of-copyright, books on those manuscripts are not as reliable as
later ones; scholarship pays, particularly in the light of the greater
number of manuscripts known these days. So the best scholarship is in
the more recent books (and CP, etc corrigenda web-sites, of course) and
those are not out_of_copyright. So we may never benefit from from that
Google project.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Gordon Banks
Re: Google Print - trouble ahead?
In scientific publishing there has been an uproar lately over "open"
publishing. There was an article on it in Monday's Wall Street Journal.
Groups of scientists have gotten together to form Internet publishing
consortiums, with all the peer review mechanisms, but without the
necessity of subscribing and paying for the information. This has
alarmed publishers such as Elsivier who make generous profits, yet pass
essentially none of it on to the authors. In some cases, the authors
are even charged to have their paper published. These journals are
extremely expensive for libraries. Individuals generally can't afford
them. The libraries would love not to have to subscribe to them. I
think the Internet is bound to kill off some of the old ways of
disseminating information, and the those who depend on the current
establishment are naturally not happy about it and will try to stop it.
I hope they are unable to do so. As for the Google project, I hope it
can use the snippets because being able to search books still under
copyright would be so useful, even if it means you end up buying the
book to get the information you need. In the end, it may actually
increase book sales, at least for some books.
On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 13:48 +0100, Chris Phillips wrote:
Gordon Banks <geb@gordonbanks.com>
publishing. There was an article on it in Monday's Wall Street Journal.
Groups of scientists have gotten together to form Internet publishing
consortiums, with all the peer review mechanisms, but without the
necessity of subscribing and paying for the information. This has
alarmed publishers such as Elsivier who make generous profits, yet pass
essentially none of it on to the authors. In some cases, the authors
are even charged to have their paper published. These journals are
extremely expensive for libraries. Individuals generally can't afford
them. The libraries would love not to have to subscribe to them. I
think the Internet is bound to kill off some of the old ways of
disseminating information, and the those who depend on the current
establishment are naturally not happy about it and will try to stop it.
I hope they are unable to do so. As for the Google project, I hope it
can use the snippets because being able to search books still under
copyright would be so useful, even if it means you end up buying the
book to get the information you need. In the end, it may actually
increase book sales, at least for some books.
On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 13:48 +0100, Chris Phillips wrote:
Not surprisingly, publishers are concerned about Google's plans to digitise
copyright volumes in a number of academic libraries, announced last
December.
The Association of American University Presses has written to Google asking
for clarification of a number of questions, including Google's basic claim
that it will be able to justify making digital copies of entire libraries as
"fair use". A copy of the letter is available on the Association's website:
http://aaupnet.org/aboutup/issues/0865_001.pdf
It's interesting that the letter mentions that Google has a patent
application pending on a pay-per-view system. According to the initial press
release, Google planned to make the text of older volumes, not protected by
copyright, freely available through its website. But if Google is going down
the pay-per-view route, this enormous body of older material could be an
obvious saleable commodity.
Here's a news article from last December about Google's patent application:
http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/3446211
Chris Phillips
--
Gordon Banks <geb@gordonbanks.com>
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: Google Print - Trouble Ahead?
Good for you!
Now if more people would just follow those two simple rules we should
all see far less gibberish on USENET.
DSH
""Richard C. Browning, Jr."" <brownrc@anet-dfw.com> wrote in message
news:002f01c5618e$5aa4b080$8a0c020a@MyNotbook...
| I should learn not to change my train of thought in the middle of a
sentence and to proof
| read better. The phrase "no longer in the public domain", should read
"No longer under
| Copyright protection". Sorry about that.
|
| Richard C. Browning, Jr.
| Grand Prairie, TX
|
|
| > -----Original Message-----
| > From: Richard C. Browning, Jr. [mailto:brownrc@anet-dfw.com]
| > Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 19:53
| > To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
| > Subject: RE: Google Print - trouble ahead?
| >
| >
| > I suggest that before anyone gets to upset, that they read
| > what Google has to say about
| > this program. Check it all out at
| >
| > http://print.google.com/googleprint/about.html and the two
| > links to the Publisher and
| > Library Projects. It explains a lot.
| >
| > I still don't know how I feel about its impact to publishers
| > that don't want their
| > documents, along with publisher information and where to buy
| > their documents included, but
| > items that are no longer in the public domain or only
| > available as image scans on CD that
| > are now searchable will be a great boon to research.
| >
| > Richard C. Browning, Jr.
| > Grand Prairie, TX
Now if more people would just follow those two simple rules we should
all see far less gibberish on USENET.
DSH
""Richard C. Browning, Jr."" <brownrc@anet-dfw.com> wrote in message
news:002f01c5618e$5aa4b080$8a0c020a@MyNotbook...
| I should learn not to change my train of thought in the middle of a
sentence and to proof
| read better. The phrase "no longer in the public domain", should read
"No longer under
| Copyright protection". Sorry about that.
|
| Richard C. Browning, Jr.
| Grand Prairie, TX
|
|
| > -----Original Message-----
| > From: Richard C. Browning, Jr. [mailto:brownrc@anet-dfw.com]
| > Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 19:53
| > To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
| > Subject: RE: Google Print - trouble ahead?
| >
| >
| > I suggest that before anyone gets to upset, that they read
| > what Google has to say about
| > this program. Check it all out at
| >
| > http://print.google.com/googleprint/about.html and the two
| > links to the Publisher and
| > Library Projects. It explains a lot.
| >
| > I still don't know how I feel about its impact to publishers
| > that don't want their
| > documents, along with publisher information and where to buy
| > their documents included, but
| > items that are no longer in the public domain or only
| > available as image scans on CD that
| > are now searchable will be a great boon to research.
| >
| > Richard C. Browning, Jr.
| > Grand Prairie, TX
-
Richard C. Browning, Jr.
RE: Google Print - trouble ahead?
I suggest that before anyone gets to upset, that they read what Google has to say about
this program. Check it all out at
http://print.google.com/googleprint/about.html and the two links to the Publisher and
Library Projects. It explains a lot.
I still don't know how I feel about its impact to publishers that don't want their
documents, along with publisher information and where to buy their documents included, but
items that are no longer in the public domain or only available as image scans on CD that
are now searchable will be a great boon to research.
Richard C. Browning, Jr.
Grand Prairie, TX
this program. Check it all out at
http://print.google.com/googleprint/about.html and the two links to the Publisher and
Library Projects. It explains a lot.
I still don't know how I feel about its impact to publishers that don't want their
documents, along with publisher information and where to buy their documents included, but
items that are no longer in the public domain or only available as image scans on CD that
are now searchable will be a great boon to research.
Richard C. Browning, Jr.
Grand Prairie, TX
-
Richard C. Browning, Jr.
RE: Google Print - trouble ahead?
I should learn not to change my train of thought in the middle of a sentence and to proof
read better. The phrase "no longer in the public domain", should read "No longer under
Copyright protection". Sorry about that.
Richard C. Browning, Jr.
Grand Prairie, TX
read better. The phrase "no longer in the public domain", should read "No longer under
Copyright protection". Sorry about that.
Richard C. Browning, Jr.
Grand Prairie, TX
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard C. Browning, Jr. [mailto:brownrc@anet-dfw.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 19:53
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: RE: Google Print - trouble ahead?
I suggest that before anyone gets to upset, that they read
what Google has to say about
this program. Check it all out at
http://print.google.com/googleprint/about.html and the two
links to the Publisher and
Library Projects. It explains a lot.
I still don't know how I feel about its impact to publishers
that don't want their
documents, along with publisher information and where to buy
their documents included, but
items that are no longer in the public domain or only
available as image scans on CD that
are now searchable will be a great boon to research.
Richard C. Browning, Jr.
Grand Prairie, TX