[IP] more on An author's dissent on Google Print
Begin forwarded message:
From: David Pakman <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: October 29, 2005 8:59:58 PM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [IP] more on An author's dissent on Google Print
Dave,
I must admit, I am slightly baffled by the somewhat twisted arguments
employed by those defending Google's actions.
Google is copying (the entire) author's work without permission. Full
stop.
Copyright mandates the permission of the copyright owner before this is
permitted. Unless, and only unless, the fair use defense is successfully
employed.
This cannot be fair use because, among so many other reasons, the copier
is a COMMERCIAL entity actually making money by selling advertising
around the copied works. The work is not transmuted either, just various
selections are displayed at various times.
So, regardless of Google's intentions ("to sell more of the author's
works"), they need permission. In fact, they even began the project by
seeking permission from the publishers. Apparently, when that took too
long, they resorted to just moving ahead WITHOUT permission.
If people believe Google should have the right to move ahead (without
express permission of the copyright holders) because of the potential
benefits to authors, those people should seek changes in copyright law
to allow such appropriation of the owner's works without permission.
In the meantime, Google has the actual law to deal with.
And they are going to get crushed in court. (See Jed Rakoff's decision
in the mp3.com case. Almost an identical case.)
David
-----Original Message-----
From: David Farber [mailto:dave@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 8:17 PM
To: Ip Ip
Subject: [IP] more on An author's dissent on Google Print
Begin forwarded message:
From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: October 29, 2005 8:00:37 PM EDT
To: julian.dibbell@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: dave@xxxxxxxxxx, lauren@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] An author's dissent on Google Print
From: Julian Dibbell <julian.dibbell@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: October 29, 2005 7:06:48 PM EDT
...
Google
Print for Libraries is essentially making the same offer -- and saving
publishers and authors the trouble of sending in the copies.
...
The rights for the first book have reverted to me, and I have
submitted it to the Google Print for Publishers program because
frankly, whenever they get around to copying my intellectual property
out of some library won't be soon enough for me.
Julian and Dave,
I believe that the statements quoted above illustrate key aspects of the
concerns. Google isn't "making an offer" to authors when it comes to
Google Print for Libraries-- that implies asking permission ahead of
time -- which clearly Google hasn't been doing. And you note that you
have submitted your book (to Google Print for
Publishers) -- indicating that you had free choice. This is in contrast
to Google Print for Libraries, where Google's plan has simply been to
make the copies without affirmative permission unless publishers
individually opt-out every book of concern.
Individual choice is really at the heart of the matter.
In the privacy arena (especially on the Web), I've frequently noticed
how various dubious projects have sucked in users by default, often with
complex "opt-out" procedures to "permit" them to escape (that is, when
escape is permitted). The people behind these business plans almost
inevitably proclaim how incredibly wonderful their services are for
consumers, and how almost everyone will love it.
If I suggest that a service that's so great should have no problem
operating on an opt-in rather than opt-out basis, these folks clam up
suddenly. They know damned well that a lot of people -- perhaps most
people -- won't be interested in participating and would not opt-in, so
conscription becomes the order of the day.
It appears likely that some of the same reasoning is behind Google Print
for Libraries in significant respects.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren@xxxxxxxx or lauren@xxxxxxxxxx or lauren@xxxxxxxx
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
- People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Co-Founder, EEPI
- Electronic Entertainment Policy Initiative - http://www.eepi.org
Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com Member, ACM Committee
on Computers and Public Policy Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
DayThink: http://daythink.vortex.com
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as david@xxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/