Print
Google is the company that is world famous for its motto “Do No Evil”, but in the world of online book scanning, the Open Book Alliance isn’t ready to take them at their word. The OBA, founded by the Internet Archive, has become a united voice for those who feel Google was handed a monopoly with its $125 million settlement with publishers. The primary argument is that competitors such as the Internet Archive, are forced to negotiate individual contracts with rights holders, while Google can simply scan now, and pay later when the author makes a claim.
“If this deal goes ahead, they’re making a real shot at being the library, and the only library” claims Internet Archives founder Brewster Kahle. Until recently the Open Book Alliance has been lacking any real corporate muscle, but with the recent inclusion of Microsoft, Yahoo, and Amazon into the alliance, they definitely will be taken much more seriously. With the outcome of the Department of Justice investigation into the matter still pending, Google is quickly finding itself in a very public battle over digital book rights, and they seem to be making many more enemies than friends these days.
According the OBA, anti-trust and anti-competitive concerns are an important focus, but they also worry about Google’s commitment to privacy. The American Libraries Association claims “When it comes to privacy, the agreement is silent on the issue with regards to what Google intends to do with the data it collects”.
Will the addition of Microsoft, Yahoo, and Amazon into the alliance help ensure equality in the book scanning industry?
Comments are closed on this article
borisdblade
August 23, 2009 at 4:00pm
Microsoft has never sold a book, Yahoo has never sold a book. Amazon was know for books, but now it's another ebay. they have no basis for fighting this. Library's are free. Nationwide. Go to the Library of Congress, free. New York, free. Google wants to put a library on the internet, go for it! The others are just pissed because they didn't think of the idea first. They'd charge $20 a month for 5 book downloads. I'm going to stand up for Google on this one. It's not about money, it's about bringing knowledge to the masses in a widely understood medium.
When was the last time you visited your library and actually checked out a book Microsoft, Yahoo and Amazon? People now want all the extras for no extra charge. I'm tired of being nickle and dimed to bankruptcy because some 'poor' little conglomorate can't seem to stop being greedy and take more money than what's reasonable for a crappy service. It's quality over quantity CEO's. Put out a quality product or service and you'll have customers willing to stand for your shoddy Indian phone reps with accents so thick it's almost a waste of time to listen.
WindowsXP
August 23, 2009 at 5:20pm
Couldnt have said it better.
Im sure theyd make a library a monopoly if they could.
Walnut
August 23, 2009 at 2:51pm
OH NO! Google's free library is better than our free library! SUE SUE SUE!
What a joke. Yeah, their tactics are underhanded, and they need to come up with a better way of doing things. At the same time, as I understand it, the only books that you can read for free are out of copyright. You can search other books for terms and whatnot, and they'll give you links to places where you can buy or check out the book. They'll show you a few sample pages if they have a deal with the publisher, which is more of a marketing tactic than anything else. Hasn't Amazon been doing that for years?
w2ed
August 23, 2009 at 2:32pm
Of all the corporations to add to their "Alliance," You couldn't have picked three worse companies together than what you have here. Microsoft and Yahoo are both direct competitors to Google, still sore over the search engine war, and are into an alliance of their own - both of them joining ain't to better the internet, but a destructive aid towards bringing down a competitor. Amazon, on the other hand, is also a competitor in the digital book form, albeit being limitted to the Kindle and other devices and readers who can read their format. Altruistic reasons are not there for any of these three.
I'm not into Google's solution - if I make a product, I certainly don't want anyone to just go and give it away for free, even if I get paid from it, either through people going and buying it afterwards or from the company paying me to do so, without my permission first. Google's tactics in the matter is garbage, and I'd be in full support of the OBA if not for their corporate sponsors. At this point, both sides can go - wait, this is a family-read magazine isn't it? Both sides can go somewhere else then...
nekollx
August 24, 2009 at 9:45am
the thing is google is archives oout of copy right, out of print books. So at most they would have a few sample pages of your new Harry the Pothead book with links to your Lulu store.
I don't see a problem with that.
------------------------------
Coming soon to Lulu.com --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.
dc10ten
August 23, 2009 at 1:06pm
heh heh microsoft is on the alliance, pointing fingers at google for being a monopoly.
"aint that the pot who called the kettle black"
