twodoebs

Random Thoughts From Our Random Minds

Friday, May 27, 2005

 

Publishers balk at Google book copy plan

By: doebtown
A few months ago, online search behemoth Google announced plans to scan EVERY book at four major libraries and make the FULL text of these books searchable and available to anyone with an internet connection. The project was dubbed Google Print and--for my money--is the best thing to come to the internet since . . . well, since Google.

My thought? Information wants to be free. You can add it to a list of my mantras (note to self: a list of mantras would be a good blog posting). We have, here, the possibility to set the framework for every person on the planet to have reasonable access to mankind's collective intelligence. I realize that the model of Sweet Kati and I sitting around surfing the web as we sip coffee, each of us on our own laptops that are connected to the web via wireless networks, is far from villagers in Africa logging on to check in on new methods of crop rotation. But it's a START at the type of global information sharing that was pioneered by Gutenberg with his printing press (ah YES, the printing press . . . EVERY comparison of new internet technologies ALWAYS seems to come back to the printing press, doesn't it?).

Google Print, of course, only works if the publishers of the books that will be included cooperate. Trouble is, where they initially agreed that the project would represent a significant step forward in information communication, they've recently changed their tune. Their beef?--what else: copyrights. More specifically the economic damage Google Print will cause to their model of business that has heretofore been protected by copyrights.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm an entertainment lawyer (well, I guess up until two days ago, I WAS an entertainment lawyer . . . now I'm just unemployed) and I understand the importance of the Copyright Act. But how MANY media industries need to get socked before they start to realize that the Copyright Act is an artifact of a bygone era? It's fundamental that the PURPOSE of the Copyright Act--as dictated by the U.S. Constitution (Article 1 Section 8)--is "To PROMOTE the PROGRESS of . . . [the] Arts." Expecting the copyright scheme to prevent old technologies from being superseded by new ones is just plain crazy. All these industries worry about the Napsterization of their business models? Guess what?--"napsterization" is just a synonym for PROGRESSIVE development. Information WANTS to be free!

Somebody convince me otherwise!


Publishers balk at Google book copy plan

Comments: Post a Comment

Archives

April 2005   May 2005   June 2005   July 2005   August 2005   September 2005   October 2005   November 2005   December 2005   January 2006   February 2006   March 2006   April 2006   May 2006   June 2006   July 2006   August 2006   September 2006   November 2006   December 2006   January 2007   February 2007   March 2007   April 2007   May 2007   July 2007   August 2007   September 2007   October 2007   November 2007   December 2007   January 2008   February 2008   March 2008   April 2008   May 2008   June 2008   July 2008   August 2008   September 2008   October 2008   November 2008   December 2008   January 2009   February 2009   March 2009   April 2009   May 2009   June 2009   July 2009   August 2009   September 2009   October 2009   November 2009   December 2009   January 2010   February 2010   March 2010   April 2010   May 2010   June 2010   July 2010   August 2010   September 2010   October 2010   November 2010   December 2010   January 2011   February 2011   March 2011   April 2011   May 2011   June 2011   July 2011   August 2011   September 2011   October 2011   November 2011   December 2011   January 2012   February 2012   March 2012   April 2012   May 2012   June 2012   July 2012   October 2012   December 2012  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Free Web Counters