Crkn agm oct 2009 google books settlement
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Crkn agm oct 2009 google books settlement

on

  • 200 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
200
Views on SlideShare
200
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Crkn agm oct 2009 google books settlement Crkn agm oct 2009 google books settlement Presentation Transcript

  • The Google Book Settlement:What it means for Canadianlibraries, universities andresearchers*Tony HoravaUniversity of OttawaCRKN AGM, Oct 8, 2009* Several of these slides aretaken from a presentationjointly made with Sian Meikle,University of Toronto
  • Overview Quick survey of proposed settlement Access to Google Books Copyright issues Marketplace impacts Competition issues Privacy matters Academic freedom Questions and conclusion.Google Books Settlement - CRKN 2AGM
  • Google Book Search Started in 2004 42 Library Partners & Publisher Partners program Google-funded In-copyright and out-of-copyright material – Google and selected library partner servers only 10 million books to date: – 2 million public domain (20%) – 7.5 million in copyright, out of print (75%) – 0.5 million in copyright, in print (5%) Eventual aim: 30 million booksGoogle Books Settlement - CRKN 3AGM
  • Proposed Google Books Settlement 2005 – US class-action lawsuit against Google – American Publishers Association – American Authors Guild October 28 2008 – proposed settlement announced – Possible outcomes: accept, reject, or court oversight – Changing the agreement is not an option Nov 9 2009 (moved from June 11 09) – Sept 18: US Department of Justice advises Court not to accept settlement but to encourage further discussion – Sept 24: Court accepts motion to delay final hearing; will hold status conference on Nov 9 instead – a modified agreement to be presented.Google Books Settlement - CRKN 4AGM
  • Google Books Settlement outline Covers online access in the US for books only: – published before January 5 2009 – covered by Berne copyright convention (164 countries) – “Could” cover books published after above date Google pays $125 million – $34.5 million to establish Book Registry – $45 million to rights holders for books scanned prior to May 2009 ($60 per title) – $45.5 million for legal fees Split of future revenues: – 63% to copyright holders – 37% to GoogleGoogle Books Settlement - CRKN 5AGM
  • Google Books Settlement – products Display uses (saleable products): – Access, preview, snippets, book records Non display uses (free and research products): – Display of metadata only; full-text and geographic indexing without display of text; analytical research across corpus; and Google R&D Inclusion: – In print books: need to opt-in to display uses – Out of print books: need to opt-out of display uses – In print = commercially available in USA and Europe Products: – Individuals: sale of perpetual access per title via Google server – Institutions: sale of annual access to ISDGoogle Books Settlement - CRKN 6AGM
  • Book Rights Registry Non-profit independent agency representing plaintiff interests to: – Manage rights database: copyright status, contact information, rights information – Negotiates terms and prices of online book uses on behalf of rights holders – Distribute share of revenue to rights holders, based on formula in agreement – The Registry does not have to be made public.Google Books Settlement - CRKN 7AGM
  • The ‘Research Corpus’ Represents all Google books except in-copyright works whose rights holders have removed their works Hosted at Google, up to two other mirror sites ‘Non-consumptive’ research: – linguistic analysis, automated translation, book relationships, index/search techniques  If qualified users want to search the Research Corpus for ‘non consumptive’ research, e.g. textual or linguistic analysis, their research agenda needs to be approved by the host institution  “Research Agenda” means a document that describes a research project in sufficient detail to demonstrate that it will be Non-Consumptive Research” (p. 17 of Settlement)  Host institution is responsible. What will the criteria be?  This will certainly conflict with academic freedom…fundamental values will be at playGoogle Books Settlement - CRKN 8AGM
  • What has the reaction been? Positive: – Enormous corpus representing our cultural heritage that is available to wide audience – Lack of ‘Orphan works’ legislation in US Congress is bypassed. NB- orphan works are those for which the rights holder is unknown or un-locatable. Concerns: – A de facto monopoly & copyright issues – Pricing – Intellectual freedom & Equity of access – Privacy – Long-term security of dataGoogle Books Settlement - CRKN 9AGM
  • Copyright and monopoly challenges Raises public policy issues regarding the delicate balance between public and private good; how does it reflect upon the nature of copyright in a digital world? The interests of one group (known rights holders) are pitted against another (absent rights holders or orphans) in relation to revenue sharing and pricing. Can a class-action settlement provide equity for economic rights and address the public good? Compulsory licensing via class action settlement is supplanting copyright legislation as the driver for reproducing and disseminating in-copyright books (in a commercial model) to our collective cultural heritage – enormous risk for the stewardship role of libraries. What if Google’s business model completely changes in twenty years?Google Books Settlement - CRKN 10AGM
  • Copyright and monopoly challenges (2) The Registry will not be available to the public - a key tool is being developed privately The board of the Registry will have no librarian or reader representation… this is very problematic for a balanced approach to copyright, access, and pricing. Will have a damper effect on Open Access and Creative Commons licensing – an ‘institutional bias’ (Samuelson) against it. How will this affect the long- term plans of the Open Content Alliance, for example No other provider can be offered license terms better than Google’s for ten years – creates a virtual monopoly and enormous lead time advantage. Google has exclusive right to digitize the orphan works.Google Books Settlement - CRKN 11AGM
  • Pricing concerns Pricing to be determined by: the pricing of similar products & services; the scope of books available; the quality of the scan; and features offered via the subscription The settlement refers to two broad goals: 1)Market realization of revenues for rights holders, and 2) Broad access by the public including institutions of higher education …to be based on “comparable products and services”. But which ones?. Could lead to a widening of the digital divide between wealthier and poorer libraries. Lack of balance in these two objectives is a key reason for postponement.Google Books Settlement - CRKN 12AGM
  • Intellectual Freedom and Equity of Access Google can exclude a book for editorial reasons: on what basis? Pressure from governments or powerful interest groups could have an important impact, e.g. Google saving itself from embarrassment or bad PR by suppressing a controversial book The Settlement requires Google to provide public access and the ISD for only 85% of the in-copyright, not commercially available books (potentially 1M books) Censorship & freedom of expression – another conflict with library values Works within works might be excluded, depending on rights holder exercising his rights independently, eg an essay, a poem, a chart or a table The Settlement doesn’t include pictorial works, eg photographs and illustrations will be blacked out.Google Books Settlement - CRKN 13AGM
  • Privacy concerns Google has an unprecedented opportunity to monitor and track user reading habits, eg when a user prints out pages from a book in the ISD, there will be a visible watermark displaying encrypted session information “which could be used to identify the authorized user that printed the material or the access point from which the material was printed” (art 4.1) “For purchases of online e-book access or access via institutional subscriptions, Google will have the technical ability to track every page that one views, even recording how long is spent on a page.” (Alan Inouye, ALA) For which purposes will Google collect data? What are the safeguards against misuse of data?Google Books Settlement - CRKN 14AGM
  • Questions Google is becoming a digital library of mammoth proportions - the purpose of our libraries and in particular our collections will be questioned. How do we partner with Google to take advantage of this dizzying opportunity for ‘’ breathing new commercial life into millions of long forgotten, commercially unavailable works” Can library values be respected in a modified settlement? Can a modified settlement allow Google, publishers, and authors to find compromise between private and public interests? Will it lead to ‘copyright peace’? (Department of Justice filing) How does it impact or challenge the ways in which students, researchers and others access culture, and enhance, collaborate, and produce new cultural works for education and scholarship? We need to monitor developments closely, and engage in vigorous, balanced advocacy with our stakeholders, and show support for US libraries & organizations that are raising serious concernsGoogle Books Settlement - CRKN 15AGM
  • Conclusion • The Google Books Settlement offers much opportunity but many challenges - we need to monitor developments closely, engage in vigorous, balanced advocacy with our stakeholders, and show support for US libraries & organizations that have made their submissions (filings available in the Public Index)Google Books Settlement - CRKN 16AGM