Passionate about IP! Since June 2003 the IPKat has covered copyright, patent, trade mark, designs, info-tech and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective. Read, post comments and participate!

The team is Eleonora Rosati, Annsley Merelle Ward and Merpel. E-mail the Kats here!

The team is joined by GuestKats Kevin Bercimuelle-Chamot, Jocelyn Bosse, Alessandro Cerri, Anastasiia Kyrylenko, Marcel Pemsel and Anna Maria Stein.

SpecialKats: Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo (TechieKat), Antonios Baris (Book Review Editor), Rose Hughes (PatKat) and Chijioke Okorie (Africa Correspondent).

InternKats: Asude Sena Moya and Söğüt Atilla.
Home / / ANOTHER GOOGLE IP PROBLEM

ANOTHER GOOGLE IP PROBLEM


ZDNet reports that Google is temporarily postponing its plans to scan books of five of the world’s top libraries and make them available in searchable form under the Google Print title. The delay has come after copyright-based objections from publishers. Google’s response is to give publishers the opportunity to opt out of being included in the programme if they notify Google. Scanning of books will restart in November.

The IPKat thinks that this is subverting the basics of copyright law. It’s for the copyright holder to grant permission to use his work and not the other way around.
ANOTHER GOOGLE IP PROBLEM ANOTHER GOOGLE IP PROBLEM Reviewed by Anonymous on Monday, August 15, 2005 Rating: 5

6 comments:

  1. AnonymousTuesday, 16 August 2005 at 02:03:00 GMT+1

    Its not subverting the basics of copyright at all - its Fair Use. By asking the publishers they're just being courteous.

    The question to ask is: if Google Print is taken to court will the defence of Fair Use hold up?

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousTuesday, 16 August 2005 at 08:49:00 GMT+1

    Mass-scaning of five of the world’s top libraries is a fair use ? rather not...

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousTuesday, 16 August 2005 at 12:18:00 GMT+1

    I can scan any book I own, this is allowed. (Backup copies, etc.) This is what Google are doing. They bought the books.

    Then I can photocopy a few pages for someone, this is fair use. This is what Google are doing.

    Don't you think a company as large as Google has lawyers to think this kind of thing through?

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousTuesday, 16 August 2005 at 22:15:00 GMT+1

    I think the most interesting aspect of this is that a company has (finally) found a way of making money out of freely distributing information.

    One of the themes in Eldred was that where legislation could be shown to benefit a minority interest, it should be construed, in cases of ambiguity, in favour of the public (or rather it should provide the most socially efficient outcome). The argument was rejected, but some hope does arise that now google itself may provide some balance in the special interest groups lobbying for legislation; after all it is in Google's best interests that fair use provisions are clear and well defined, that copyright terms are not excessive, and that orphan works are not rendered inaccessible.

    If this sounds fanciful, then do remember that in June Google was the most valuable media company in the world, ahead of Time Warner.

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousMonday, 24 October 2005 at 02:33:00 GMT+1

    Your site is quite interesting - make money in stock market- Keep up the good work. My domain is make money in stock market. please check it out.

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousFriday, 28 October 2005 at 21:43:00 GMT+1

    Enjoyed your blog.
    Please visit
    Advanced Business Marketing
    And leave your comment.

    ReplyDelete

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )
Powered by Blogger.