Alan Morton-Smith
Mindreign.com
21/09/2009
Google Books is an ambitious project, for which the ultimate goal is create a comprehensive, searchable, virtual card catalogue of all books in all languages. To that end, they have already digitised about ten million books and made them discoverable online. It’s a key plank in the company’s strategy to “organise the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”, as their mission statement has it. Launched towards the end of 2004 in partnership with several high-profile university and public libraries, it now also incorporates the in-copyright books of thousands of publishers as well.
This process has not been without controversy, and there have been a multitude of allegations, lawsuits and protests about the company’s actions since its inception. One of the main points of contention are so-called “orphan” books — that is, books still protected under copyright, but which belong people who cannot be traced. A group of authors and publishers in America sued in 2005, citing “massive copyright infringement”. In October 2008 a settlement was reached, in which Google set aside $125 million to resolve outstanding copyright claims, and said it would share any future proceeds. It would also provide the means for copyright owners of out-of-print books to submit claims to Google, and lead to the establishment an independent Books Rights Registry. Both parties are currently seeking judicial approval for this deal.
Several rivals, including Microsoft and Yahoo!, Google’s major competitors in a number of fields, are vehemently opposed to the settlement. Indeed, Microsoft has gone so far as to say that it is “an unprecedented misuse of the judicial system”. They started their own book digitisation programme in 2005, but wound it down less than three years later. Amazon, the principal retailer of books online, is similarly against the agreement, labelling it “dangerous”, and noting that it could give rise to a “cartel structure that leaves the public susceptible to abuses”. All of these firms, in conjunction with such organisations as the British Library, are members of the Open Content Alliance. This group is pushing for Congress to intervene, as they feel that this would lead to a more equitable solution than the settlement.
Across the other side of the Atlantic, the European Union is in the process of reviewing copyright law, to establish whether it is still fit for purpose in the digital age. The picture in Europe is much more complicated than in the US, with each of the 27 member states having their own varying rules. Earlier this month, the EU started a round of hearings on the Google project, which is interesting in the context of already having their own publicly-funded digitisation project, in the guise of Europeana. There is a fear that should the agreement between Google and the authors and publishers be given the go-ahead, it could put European education and research institutions at a significant disadvantage to their American counterparts.
For Google’s part, they argue that the nature of a class-action suit means that it is impossible to open up the deal to other parties. They also note that the project actually increases competition in the market for digital books, and significantly expands online access to works, with its initiative offering a counterpoint to such services as Amazon’s Kindle, which is currently the dominant player. There’s also a significant gain to be made in resolving the status of books whose owners are proving difficult to trace, as well as the issue of excessively long copyright periods. Millions of in-copyright works, including hard-to-find out-of-print books would be made available, providing them with greater exposure, and potentially generating new revenue.
Google would also offer very extensive access to its digitised library, including being able to view free, full-text online editions at American public libraries. This would be at no charge to the library or the reader. In addition, universities and other organisations would be able to obtain institutional subscriptions to collections from some of the world’s most renowned libraries, including Harvard and Oxford. The firm is also making conciliatory gestures, such as the recent hint that they would let other internet companies sell digital copies of their out-of-print books. The previously mentioned Book Rights Registry, which was created with an initial $34 million from the firm, is an independent, not-for-profit organisation which would seek out copyright holders, maintain accurate contact information for them, and provide a way to opt in or out of Google Books.
Whilst this is clearly a deeply contentious issue, and Google’s creed of “don’t be evil” has not always been upheld (in their censoring of search results at the behest of the Chinese government, for example) the greatly increased access this project offers to researchers across the globe is a boon for human knowledge, and benefits us all. On a slightly more prosaic note, the potential for the firm emerging with an unfairly dominant position in the book business can also be said of Amazon at the moment. The establishment of a major alternative would be most welcome. Sony, for example, is in favour, and has said that it would have “numerous and significant pro-competitive effects”. On the issue of finance, Google will be paying 63 percent of royalties generated to the copyright owners, in addition to the initial financial settlement. There is also the potential for added revenues for these owners via library access, in the form of per-page printing fees. The firm’s approach has drawn the ire of many, but the end result will be free access to great collections of the written word.
Leave a Reply