Google books – let a wonderful innovation go full steam ahead

Copyright 9 Comments

It’s truly a great pity sometimes to see wonderfully innovative projects become unnecessarily bogged down in legal challenges.

This includes Google’s book scanning project, and given the significance of the benefits of the project from the viewpoint of the general public, I feel that it would be a great pity of the project was subject to any further substantial form of hindrance or delay.

 
Misguided objections
Perhaps I have not properly understood the nature of the objections to the project, under which Google has scanned a wide range of books from around the world and compiled them into a huge database, allowing users to easily discover books which are relevant to their topic of interest. But I don’t see how any of them stand up to any form of scrutiny.

These objections seem to boil down to three main categories:

 
• Breach of copyright.

Not being a legal expert, I am not in any kind of position to make informed comment with regard to the question of whether or not the project indeed breaches any form of legal right to which copyright holders may be entitled in America or any other country.

But from an ethical viewpoint, I find it hard to see how copyright holders have much of a legitimate complaint. Google has already gone to more than sufficient respect for their rights. Where the publications in question are subject to copyright, Google displays only miniscule snippets of the text which surround the relevant search term (although copyright holders do have the option of granting explicit permission to display either the entire publication or large sections of it). Even then, copyright holders who feel genuinely aggrieved even at this can have their publication removed altogether upon request.

This would seem more than fair, and I really don’t know what else Google could reasonably do in this regard.

 
• Creation of an uncompetitive monopoly.

True, Google enjoys a monopoly position in this area, which will be further entrenched if a settlement with the Authors Guild and American Association of Publishers is allowed to proceed.

But this is only because they have done something which competitors have so far been unwilling or unable to do.

Monopolies are objectionable where they are created and maintained by unduly restrictive conduct on the part of the monopolist, not in situations like this where they simply represent a natural outcome of one company being well ahead of its competitors.

As far as I understand it, there is absolutely nothing at all preventing any firm or organization who wants to compete with Google in this area from simply doing what Google has done.

Google should not have to wait for its competitors to catch up before it starts reaping the rewards from its innovation.

 
• Threat to cultural diversity.

According to Wikipedia, the vast majority of books proposed to be scanned are in English. If this is the case, then it is indeed regrettable.  Not only could this result in a ‘disproportionate representation of languages in the digital world’, as Wikipedia puts it, an issue about which many Europeans are understandably sensitive, given the extent to which language represents a significant feature of their culture and identity, it could also have unintended consequences with regard to the shaping of the field of scholarship, a field in which German, Russian and French represent popular languages alongside English.

Fair argument. But on the flip side, the project allows internet users to discover a whole range of publications from different countries around the world which are relevant to their topic of interest. I would have thought will help to facilitate expansion of cultural awareness and diversity in a manner which is more than sufficient to offset any form of threat posed by any form of bias toward books written in English.

 
A truly wonderful service
Against these objections stands the very significant public benefit of the project.

Aside from the commercial benefits accruing to Google itself as well as authors and publishers, users of the service, such as casual readers, students or vocational or academic researchers derive a significant benefit through the ability to discover and locate references in their relevant area of interest or study more easily. And at a broader level, society in general should derive a significant benefit through the more efficient sharing of knowledge and expertise as well as exposure to a more diverse range of perspectives with regard to a whole range of subjects.

The project is a marvellous innovation which has already been bogged down in legal disputes for too long. It would be a great shame to see it bogged down much longer.

9 Responses to “Google books – let a wonderful innovation go full steam ahead”

  1. Fred H Schlegel Says:
    October 15th, 2009 at 9:29 am

    Being able to search books is incredibly useful and so I’m a real fan of this project as well. However, the question of ownership and copyright in this case follows the same issues that other digitized information face – basically, what rights do the owners have to determine what use their works are available for. There is no question that offering this service will generate revenue for google and could arguably reduce revenue for the book owners. (While I don’t necessarily agree with that the question really should be left up to the owners). At the very least the availability of books that otherwise would have been lost or in limited supply is a great service.

  2. Andrew Says:
    October 15th, 2009 at 2:47 pm

    Fred,

    I certainly would not dispute that owners have a right to control, to a reasonable extent, the manner and ways in which their works are distributed and used, especially by gigantic corporations.

    With regard to Google Books, any copyright holder who does not want their books used in this way can simply have their book removed on request, which I think is more than reasonable. And whilst some copyright holders may still be unhappy, I think Google has struck an appropriate balance between respecting copyright holder rights without unduly hindering its own capacity to take advantage of what I see as a very positive innovation.

  3. Brad Shorr Says:
    October 15th, 2009 at 8:44 pm

    Andrew, As Fred mentions, this whole brouhaha reminds me of the music industry’s slow and painful adaption to digital, web based technology.It’s probably going to take a while for new monetization models to flesh themselves out, given that all the parties – authors, content distributors, and content consumers – all have varying interests and rights. I’m guessing Google is pressing forward hard on this in response to Amazon’s Kindle, which is a very promising technology. In the long run, I’m confident books will be widely available in all languages one way or another: once technology is out of the bottle you can’t stuff it back in.

  4. Meryl KEvans Says:
    October 15th, 2009 at 9:05 pm

    This is a tough topic to be sure as we don’t want to put publishers out of business. Many of us still love books in our hands. It sounds like Google is trying to keep everyone’s interests in mind.

  5. drew Says:
    October 17th, 2009 at 7:03 am

    Brad,

    Yes, I would imagine that the industry structure associated with books in electronic form will take some time to sort itself out, and that things could be a little messy in this respect over the next few years.

    Hopefully, you are right in relation to your last point about books in all languages becoming more widely available. Projects like Google’s certainly help to move things forward.

    Merryl,

    Yep, not an easy issue, and as you say, Google has done it’s best to ensure that it’s project does not unduly harm the legitimate interests of authors or publishers.

  6. Karen Swim Says:
    October 19th, 2009 at 10:03 pm

    Andrew, great presentation of a complex issue. It is unfortunately an issue that mirrors the larger struggles we face with access and rights. Where we are now though is not how it began. Google settled a lawsuit and amended its policies. My understanding from those who have closely followed and been directly affected by this book project is that Google has not made it easy for authors to claim their rights and submit paperwork for compensation. As a reader, I love the idea of books being widely available but as an author I cringe that my digital rights will belong to Google. In this issue, I don’t think it’s a matter of the stodgy publishing industry not moving forward but a real concern about rights.

  7. drew Says:
    October 21st, 2009 at 8:43 am

    Thanks Karen,

    Certainly, I have no doubt that copyright holders do have genuine concerns, and Google does have a responsibility to provide a simple and easy process for you to claim your rights.

    You are right in saying that your digital rights should not belong to Google. As an author, you have the rights to determine how your work is distributed for as long as the publication is subject to copyright – in the digital world as well as in the offline world. However, I don’t think that Google is trying to challenge that in any way. For one thing, even under the recent settlement in America Google does not (at least this is how I understand it) have any form of exclusive right to your book in digital form at all, and even if you participate in the revenue sharing program, you as an author would still be free from a legal standpoint to market your own work online or license rivals of Google to do so. And you can always have your publication removed from the database if you so wish.

    That said, Google does have a responsibility to make the process for authors to claim their rights a simple and easy one. You should not have to jump through hoops to claim your rights.

  8. James Says:
    January 30th, 2010 at 8:11 am

    Andrew, Unfortunately there seem to be a lot of sceptics and worry-warts when it comes to Google. Maybe larger corporations have something to fear – but for the vast majority I believe that on the whole they are at the forefront of the information technology and have become fully converted to their cause. Lets hope the lawyers make their $$$ and it goes in the people favour.

  9. drew Says:
    February 2nd, 2010 at 7:15 am

    Hi James,

    Thanks for you comment and welcome to my blog.

    Google certainly is a wonderfully innovative company, and although copywrite holders may have legitimate concerns, the public benefit which will be derived from the project will no doubt be huge.

Leave a Reply

CommentLuv Enabled
Icons by N.Design Studio. Designed By Ben Swift. Powered by WordPress and Free WordPress Themes
Entries RSS