

News Archive
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
Revised Google Books Settlement Still Has Critics
November 16, 2009, 7:58 amAnother milestone in a significant legal dispute has passed; a revised version of the Google Books settlement was submitted to U.S. District Court late Friday. It looks like the book-scanning clash isn't nearly over, however, since some powerful groups still have qualms about Google's proposed resolution.
Google tried to dial back both the scope of the agreement and the degree to which it would represent a be-all, end-all decree. The settlement would now just cover books published in Australia, Canada, the U.K., and the U.S., and more of an effort would be made to find and pay the creators of so-called orphan works.
Also, Google promised that it would price its out-of-print books so that they're in line with a competitive market, and repeated an older pledge to allow book retailers to sell online access.
But here's what Peter Brantley, co-chair of the Open Book Alliance, had to say in a statement emailed to WebProNews. "Our initial review of the new proposal tells us that Google and its partners are performing a sleight of hand; fundamentally, this settlement remains a set-piece designed to serve the private commercial interests of Google and its partners."
Brantley later continued, "By performing surgical nip and tuck, Google, [the Association of American Publishers], and [the Authors Guild] are attempting to distract people from their continued efforts to establish a monopoly over digital content access and distribution; usurp Congress's role in setting copyright policy; lock writers into their unsought registry, stripping them of their individual contract rights; put library budgets and patron privacy at risk; and establish a dangerous precedent by abusing the class action process."
Jessica E. Vascellaro and Jeffrey A. Trachtenberg reported that the Department of Justice is unhappy, too.
This promises to stay interesting, then, or at least get interesting again following a lull. The next hearing on the matter should be held sometime early next year.
Related Articles:
> (Another) New Google Books Deadline Set
> Google Books Gets A Little More Organized
> November 9th Target Set In Google Books Case




