I won't state an opinion about a field about which I know little, but the gist of this story is that Google is trying to settle some class action litigation, and the settlement would rewrite copyright law. I'd appreciate my lawyer readers chiming in about it.
Lyn Chu's article is called: "Google's Book Settlement Is a Ripoff for Authors: Why allow a single publisher to throw out a functioning copyright system?"
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers accused Google of massive copyright violation for not seeking permission from rights owners to scan and index their books as part of Google's program to digitize university book collections.
In its defense, Google said that its actions qualified as fair use exceptions because it only shows snippets of texts.
Google stood a good chance to win, which would have helped clear up the issue of fair use application in the digital arena. But Google Settled.
The judgment still has to be approved by the court, and there will be Objections because the settlement agreement might be seen negatively by certain players (such as Amazon) for competitive reasons.
The agreement does not change copyright law – the rights holders keep their rights, and may still sell them elsewhere - but it will change how things operate:
The agreement creates an independent, nonprofit Book Rights Registry, which will manage the royalty system for compensating authors and publishers. This book registry will act as other collective rights organizations do, like ASCAP in the music industry.
This may raise antitrust issues.
Some say that the agreement offers a commendable example of how Internet companies and copyright holders can find a middle ground in light of the reality that digital content can be so easily and broadly distributed online.
Thanks. My understanding of property, while fairly extensive, is medieval to early modern.
Post a Comment