Authors' Guild Goes After University Book Digitization Projects 170
An anonymous reader sends this excerpt from Ars Technica:
"With the planned settlement between Google and book publishers still on indefinite hold, a legal battle by proxy has started. Google partnered with many libraries at US universities in order to gain access to the works it wants to digitize. Now, several groups that represent book authors have filed suit against those universities, attempting to block both digital lending and an orphaned works project. The suit is being brought by the Authors' Guild, its equivalents in Australia, Quebec, and the UK, and a large group of individual authors. Its target: some major US universities, including Michigan, the University of California system, and Cornell. These libraries partnered with Google to get their book digitization efforts off the ground and, in return, Google has provided them with digital copies of the works. These and many other universities have also become involved with the HathiTrust, an organization set up to help them archive and distribute digital works; the HathiTrust is also named as a defendant."
Re:oops... sorry google (Score:5, Interesting)
The JSTOR guy wasn't charged with any copyright violations. JSTOR themselves seem to have distanced themselves from the criminal prosecution too by releasing a statement that they will not pursue civil charges and, by implication, they aren't behind the criminal charges. And then last week JSTOR made all of their public domain articles freely accessible to non-subscribers.
On the other hand, Google does need a slap-down here. The people they are "negotiating" with don't have any standing wrt to abandoned works - if they did, the works would not qualify as abandoned. If Google really wants this, they need to lobby for changes in the law. The MAFIAA has no problem buying senators, Google's got more than enough money to buy practically the entire senate. If they don't have a problem with "defensive" software patents, they shouldn't have a problem with defensive lobbying either....
lol @ "the media" (Score:5, Interesting)
"Abducted?" (Score:4, Interesting)
First it was stealing, now it's abducted. The hyperbole increases. How long before we will be accused of 'killing' copyright holders? But it makes sense this time; we're dealing with the guild that supposedly represents people who know how to create inflammatory language.
Let us use our own hyperboles:
"With their infinitely extending copyrights, these guys have been commiting mass murder on the public domain!"
"They have totally vivesected our rights to have ideas come out of copyright."
"It's like they're hacking our limbs off, one by one!"
Re:Scram (Score:5, Interesting)
There really needs to be an astroturf rating.
For SexConker, what icebike said and I have to append. I have a book 200+ years old and I am damn well going to photocopy it, and will give that work up to whatever library wants to have a copy. As for the original book, long into the public domain, will be shoved up the ass of any lawyer or any copyright fist-fuck that tries to say shit.
I have some other very old books that will be scanned as well, for the preservation of their content. All in the public domain. You think my response is over the top? Copyright, and the trolls that defend it can fuck themselves. It's no longer serving the purpose it was intended for.
- One pissed off reader.
Re:oops... sorry google (Score:2, Interesting)
The MAFIAA has no problem buying senators, Google's got more than enough money to buy practically the entire senate.
Wouldn't that be evil?