Tim O’Reilly on Microsoft’s criticism of Google’s books scanning

1 Comment

1. 

   acm

   March 7, 2007 at 9:23 am

   there was a New Yorker article on this recently, which implied that the lawsuit was essentially a negotiation tactic — the same people are supporting the actual on-the-ground scanning effort, and merely hope to get some benefit for all involved. it was complicated enough (and months ago enough) that I can’t remember the details, but if their analysis was correct, the lawsuit wasn’t as dire as you might otherwise imagine.

   I’d dig it out, but I think I recycled it a few weeks ago — oh, here it is.

   Google, in an effort to put the lawsuits behind it, may agree to pay the plaintiffs more than a court would require; but, by doing so, the company would discourage potential competitors. To put it another way, being taken to court and charged with copyright infringement on a large scale might be the best thing that ever happens to Google’s foray into the printed word.

   there’s a chewier look at the lawsuit, the history of copyright law, and how the two come together here, later in the piece. Also this:

   “The suits that have been filed are a business negotiation that happens to be going on in the courts,” Marissa Mayer told me. “We think of it as a business negotiation that has a large legal-system component to it.” According to Pat Schroeder, the former congresswoman, who is the president of the Association of American Publishers, “This is basically a business deal. Let’s find a way to work this out. It can be done. Google can license these rights, go to the rights holder of these books, and make a deal.”

   it’s interesting to note that some major libraries are not allowing Google to scan any books published since the 1960s, for fear of copyright claims. also, that if Google makes a settlement, it may end up with an edge over open-access book scanning projects (already a risk inherent in having this done by a for-profit entity)… blah blah. just to add more to the mix.