June 24, 2009, 6:10 pm — Updated: 4:36 pm
Roy Blount: Say Yes to ‘Google Books’
By Motoko Rich
Google’s settlement with authors and publishers over its scanning of millions of books contained in several university libraries has come under fire recently from critics who argue that Google is effectively creating a monopoly of digital versions of books.
The criticism has centered on so-called orphan books, out-of-print books that are still in copyright but for which rights holders cannot be found.
On Wednesday, in an open letter to members, Roy Blount, the president of the Authors Guild, argued that such criticism was unwarranted.
“I would generally rather be a dissenter, myself, than not,” he wrote. But, he added: “I can’t see any reason to dissent from the settlement over the matter of orphan books.”
These books, he said, are being given an opportunity with the Google settlement — the chance to see the light of day and find readers again. “Google is essentially being accused of cornering the market on the unmarketable,” Mr. Blount, the author of “Longtime Leaving” and “Alphabet Juice.”
“To prevent a monopoly of the orphans, the dissenters would undo a wide range of benefits to authors, publishers and readers,” he concluded, appending a list of benefits of the settlement.
The Google settlement is currently the subject of a Justice Department inquiry and is also subject to court review.
Let's hear what the commentors have to say -
6 Comments
1. June 24, 2009 10:16 pm Link
If Google were really pursuing this project in the public interest, they would “open source” the OCR product of their scanning and let other entities, public and private, design their own search engines and products based on that corpus. Google Books would still probably be the most popular front end, but it would no longer be a monopoly, and Google would not have stolen millions of books for its own use.— lexicon
2. June 25, 2009 12:27 pm Link
Big anything is bad.— E. Nowak
3. June 26, 2009 10:35 am Link
Giving attention to out-of-print books is an issue? That’s like saying someone is too much of a philanthropist. Give me a break! The bad thing about getting too big is that fear, suspicion and envy are disregarded or considered ‘cool’. It probably would not be a bad thing if Google shared with others through Open Source arrangements but if they put that much work into this project, they deserve to get some attention for awhile. I would guess if they were professionally urged to follow public recommendations, they would be happy to take that action.— Pete
4. June 27, 2009 11:53 am Link
Mr. Blount - You may be right this time, but we’d all prefer if you cram a shoe in your pie hole and go back to goober land.— joe miklovic
5. July 2, 2009 11:55 am Link
Google is not charging for this service. I love the fact that I can find books that are often out of print and written in the 18th century or ealier. Its a great resouce, for FREE. I fully believe in protecting copywrite holders, but in regards to orphan books there is no harm being done.— Chip
6. July 7, 2009 8:26 pm Link
An electronic database would undoubtedly serve the public interest by increasing the availability of works which would otherwise be lost in dusty attics and moldy basements. However, I object to the monopolization of this market by Google, who has commandeered the first and most comprehensive collection of electronic books by brazen infringement. I’m not sure why they should get exactly what they want through a forced settlement. (Don’t tell me I can opt out of the settlement. Most people are going to go along with it, so the opportunity for independent “negotiation” is nil.)— cmw
7. August 15, 2009 6:53 pm Link
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
1. June 24, 2009 10:16 pm Link
If Google were really pursuing this project in the public interest, they would “open source” the OCR product of their scanning and let other entities, public and private, design their own search engines and products based on that corpus. Google Books would still probably be the most popular front end, but it would no longer be a monopoly, and Google would not have stolen millions of books for its own use.— lexicon
2. June 25, 2009 12:27 pm Link
Big anything is bad.— E. Nowak
3. June 26, 2009 10:35 am Link
Giving attention to out-of-print books is an issue? That’s like saying someone is too much of a philanthropist. Give me a break! The bad thing about getting too big is that fear, suspicion and envy are disregarded or considered ‘cool’. It probably would not be a bad thing if Google shared with others through Open Source arrangements but if they put that much work into this project, they deserve to get some attention for awhile. I would guess if they were professionally urged to follow public recommendations, they would be happy to take that action.— Pete
4. June 27, 2009 11:53 am Link
Mr. Blount - You may be right this time, but we’d all prefer if you cram a shoe in your pie hole and go back to goober land.— joe miklovic
5. July 2, 2009 11:55 am Link
Google is not charging for this service. I love the fact that I can find books that are often out of print and written in the 18th century or ealier. Its a great resouce, for FREE. I fully believe in protecting copywrite holders, but in regards to orphan books there is no harm being done.— Chip
6. July 7, 2009 8:26 pm Link
An electronic database would undoubtedly serve the public interest by increasing the availability of works which would otherwise be lost in dusty attics and moldy basements. However, I object to the monopolization of this market by Google, who has commandeered the first and most comprehensive collection of electronic books by brazen infringement. I’m not sure why they should get exactly what they want through a forced settlement. (Don’t tell me I can opt out of the settlement. Most people are going to go along with it, so the opportunity for independent “negotiation” is nil.)— cmw
7. August 15, 2009 6:53 pm Link
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Roy Blount is dead wrong. The Google Author Settlement is VERY, VERY bad for writers. By all means, OPT-OUT!!! If you don’t your intellectual property will be held hostage by Google. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid. Stand up, walk away, and live to write another day!— casinocon
You might have guessed - that last one is mine!
No comments:
Post a Comment