NPR's California Report on Google Lawsuits over Images, Books

I was interviewed the other day for this story by NPR's California Report on the Perfect 10 v. Google suit over Image Search and the various law suits over Google Print.  Only one quote got in, but it still does a decent job of laying out the issues.

I have to say, though, that while I was such an admirer of AAP Prez Pat Schroeder's work on women's rights in Congress, her intellectual dishonesty on copyright is saddening.  She claims that if Google can scan books into its Index to provide targeted search results, then "anyone can scan these books" and if that were the case, no one would ever buy a book again.

These two statements are absolutely wrong and inaccurate.  First, Google is scanning the books for a specific purpose of providing information on the relevance of the book in response to a keyword search, not to sell the book or give it away as a substitute for buying it.  In fact, it is nearly impossible for anyone to access the entire content of the book as Google only displays snippets of up to eight lines per entry.  Someone who went into a library to scan the book instead of buying it wouldn't have the fair use defense available to them because they were scanning to substitute for a sale, not scanning to serve a publicly useful non-infringing purpose. Since Google's purpose is different, its ability to claim fair use is different.

Second, I wonder if Pat Schroeder has ever actually scanned anything in her life, let along an entire book.  If not, maybe she should try.  It takes hours to scan a book properly -- just ask Brewster Kahle of the Internet Archive.  No one in their right mind would spend all the time and energy it takes to scan a book in when they can just buy it off the shelf or from an e-book company.  It's just not efficient or cost-effective.

So please, Pat, do us all a favor and get your head on straight about Google Print.  You don't have to like it; just don't lie about it.

Comments

[George Sheldon]

Mr. Schultz,

Your comments about Ms. Schroeder's position on Google's book scanning project are well taken. But I feel you overlook one important element. As a book author, I own my work and my words. I license a publisher to set the work into type, print it, distribute and sell it. It is my choice what I do with my work. I never authorized Google or anyone to scan any portion of my books. That's my right under the law. If Google, or you, or anyone else doesn't like the law, then let's have a change of the law after a public debate and a vote in Congress. Let's change it in a Democratic manner, not at the whim of a company trying to make money on work it does not own or have any right to scan or use, without the owner's permission.

[Jason Schultz]

George,

I hate to burst your bubble, but that's not the law. It's just not true. I know you want to believe it is, but if you look at the actual law and the court decisions around fair use, you'll see that time and time again, authors, photographers, and other copyright owners have argued exactly what you argue here -- that they own their work and words and that no one can use them in any way without their permission. And in every such case, the court rules against the authors. It happened when 2 Live Crew did a parody of Rob Orbison's Pretty Woman. It happened when the image search company Arribasoft made authorized thumbnails of Les Kelly's pictures. It happened when Accolade, Inc. made *hundreds* of unauthorized copies of Sega's software. So the law supports Google and would need to change to support your position. Anyone who tells you differently is not telling you the truth about american copyright law.

Best,
Jason

[Chris Langdon]

I am suing Google (Langdon v. Google, 06-319, D.Del.) for illegally censoring my ads. The internet is a public forum and Google cannot discriminate against advertisers.