GOOGLE, GOogle, google...
I love Google.
I love Google.Does this mean my opinions about the Google Book Search is biased? Maybe.
GOOGLE, GOogle, google... Publishing companies and Author Guilds hate Google (but love money).
Does this mean their opinions about the Google Book Search is biased? Maybe.
It all depends on PRIORITY.
In my humble opinion, this issue should be judged by hard cold facts, NOT opinions or varying perspectives.
GOOGLE, GOogle, google... Publishing companies and Author Guilds hate Google (but love money).
Does this mean their opinions about the Google Book Search is biased? Maybe.
It all depends on PRIORITY.
In my humble opinion, this issue should be judged by hard cold facts, NOT opinions or varying perspectives.
Let me start out with these underlying, undermined FACTS.
*Law 17 USC 107 (the United States Copyright Law) states that:
"The fair use of a copyrighted work... is not an infringement."
*Law 17 USC 107 also states that:
Fair use should be determined by four components: Work, use, amount, and affected market.
* Google guarantees FREE access to the Google Book Search, therefore is not profiting from this project, however, may be including paid advertisements in the future.
* The Google Book Search transforms book contents into snippets, creating a literary index that grants people access to book informations -- as much information as publishers and authors will allow.
* The main issue lies with books that are copyrighted but no longer in print. If permission is necessary, 50% of the books may not be included in the project due to the inefficient property system (of which does not require the author's name) that makes it impossible to track down the owners of these books, dating back to 1923.
In the Eyes of The Parties in Opposition to the Google Book Search Project:
So far, the Author's Guild of America and 5 Major Publishing Companies have filed lawsuits accusing Google of massive copyright infringement. Nick Taylor and Allan Adler, representatives of these Publishing companies state that Google is "Profiting from authors' works" and that Google "Did not ask permission", therefore cannot be supported by "fair use". The major difference between what Google and other search engines are currently doing as opposed to what The Google Book Search is doing, is that today, search engines simply provide Internet consumers easy access to existing information and pictures already located within the world wide web by usage of links, while The Goole Book Search scans copyrighted material into the world wide web. It is believed that this highly-debated issue is merely a repetition of what had occurred many years ago when a growing organization, namely BEAM>IT, allowed customers access to their CD collections anywhere -- whether at work, at home, or at a friend's house -- simply by uploading the contents of the purchased CD into the network. Peer-to-peer downloading and sharing were prevented through a personalized acccount, protected by a username and password. Unfortunately, major record companies filed lawsuits agiainst this growing organization and the court entirely refused to accept this situation as "fair use". BEAM>IT was sued for $110 million and filed for immediate bankruptcy. The Authors' Guild and the Publishing Companies are hoping for this same outcome, or at least, a share of profit within this profound innovation.
The Perspectives of the Parties in Favour of the Google Book Search:
Just as Google Image Search transforms images from the world wide web into smaller icons that create a link to original websites where authentic images are located, Google Book Search similarly creates snippets, or phrases that belong to books which are copyrighted and no longer in print. This can help consumers research about one particular topic in a book, and will not allow them to read the book entirely on the Internet. As for copyrighted books that are still being printed for sale, Google plans to negotiate with the individual publishers and authors as to how much information they will allow to be placed on this newly developed search engine. This could even help advertise these books and raise interests if a person were to stumble upon a book currently on sale but could not finish reading it on the Internet. This search engine could simply help a person narrow down which book they would like to read, and they could either purchase it or borrow it from the library. As for "fair use", permission and profit are definitely not essential components located in the law of copyrighted work. Fair use, in this case, is the fact that Google has created an innovative tool that would help many researchers and book-lovers. As for the marketing component of law 17 USC 107, the Publishing companies have themselves admitted that no loss has been and will be made in terms of monetary value. They simply want to gain a share of the pie. Going further, this technological development can help preserve culture and human evolution in two ways: 1 is by allowing users to view the oldest pieces of literatures that are no longer in print and 2 is by allowing users to gain knowledge and respect for cultural differences, as Google has promised to integrate not only English-based texts, but other international texts as well. Surprisingly, Yahoo and MSN, Google's major competitors support Google in this issue, stating that Google's innovation is of little difference with what all search engines are currently doing. They believe that "fair use" does not need permission, nor does it defy profit. They believe that questioning Google's integrity with this matter is equal to questioning the validity of all search engines.
My opinion:
I am personally in favour of the Google Book Search not because I love Google, and not because it has helped me enhance my academic knowledge through research, but because of the following (supported by the facts that I have enlisted above):
Google has not violated the Copyright law and has, in my opinion, followed "fair use" all througout. I believe that Google should be respected due to the fact that they are willing to negotiate with the Publishing companies and authors in order to determine which and how much information should be scanned for each individual books. I also respect this development because it can sincerely help audiences learn about the past and present American culture and evolution, as well as break our cultural boundaries with other countries as we get to read about their lifestyles and literary techniques. One effect that this could do is increase the database for plagiarism, but do remind yourself that plagiarism has always been present and will always be present. A positive effect with this new access to book informations is the promotion of reading books, especially to the younger populations, as well as the advertisement of books that are copyrighted and still in print. One negative effect, however, may be the threat to librarians. It is true that there might be a slight drop in the amount of people who rely on the library because the books that are open to the public and are not copyrighted will be fully scanned onto the Google database. People may prefer to simply stay at home and read an entire book on the computer. However, copyrighted books that are no longer in print will only be presented as snippets in the Internet, and people will still need to rely on the public library for these hard copies. Also, it is a fact that people would want to prevent eyestrain from the extreme usage of the computer, and book lovers would prefer reading comfortably in a peaceful library. Also, it is a waste of ink and paper if people were to print these entire books rather than borrow them in the library for free. I am extremely persuaded that the librarians will not be affected at a far extent that their jobs would be of little significance. In conclusion, I really do support Google's innovation.
*Law 17 USC 107 (the United States Copyright Law) states that:
"The fair use of a copyrighted work... is not an infringement."
*Law 17 USC 107 also states that:
Fair use should be determined by four components: Work, use, amount, and affected market.
* Google guarantees FREE access to the Google Book Search, therefore is not profiting from this project, however, may be including paid advertisements in the future.
* The Google Book Search transforms book contents into snippets, creating a literary index that grants people access to book informations -- as much information as publishers and authors will allow.
* The main issue lies with books that are copyrighted but no longer in print. If permission is necessary, 50% of the books may not be included in the project due to the inefficient property system (of which does not require the author's name) that makes it impossible to track down the owners of these books, dating back to 1923.
In the Eyes of The Parties in Opposition to the Google Book Search Project:
So far, the Author's Guild of America and 5 Major Publishing Companies have filed lawsuits accusing Google of massive copyright infringement. Nick Taylor and Allan Adler, representatives of these Publishing companies state that Google is "Profiting from authors' works" and that Google "Did not ask permission", therefore cannot be supported by "fair use". The major difference between what Google and other search engines are currently doing as opposed to what The Google Book Search is doing, is that today, search engines simply provide Internet consumers easy access to existing information and pictures already located within the world wide web by usage of links, while The Goole Book Search scans copyrighted material into the world wide web. It is believed that this highly-debated issue is merely a repetition of what had occurred many years ago when a growing organization, namely BEAM>IT, allowed customers access to their CD collections anywhere -- whether at work, at home, or at a friend's house -- simply by uploading the contents of the purchased CD into the network. Peer-to-peer downloading and sharing were prevented through a personalized acccount, protected by a username and password. Unfortunately, major record companies filed lawsuits agiainst this growing organization and the court entirely refused to accept this situation as "fair use". BEAM>IT was sued for $110 million and filed for immediate bankruptcy. The Authors' Guild and the Publishing Companies are hoping for this same outcome, or at least, a share of profit within this profound innovation.
The Perspectives of the Parties in Favour of the Google Book Search:
Just as Google Image Search transforms images from the world wide web into smaller icons that create a link to original websites where authentic images are located, Google Book Search similarly creates snippets, or phrases that belong to books which are copyrighted and no longer in print. This can help consumers research about one particular topic in a book, and will not allow them to read the book entirely on the Internet. As for copyrighted books that are still being printed for sale, Google plans to negotiate with the individual publishers and authors as to how much information they will allow to be placed on this newly developed search engine. This could even help advertise these books and raise interests if a person were to stumble upon a book currently on sale but could not finish reading it on the Internet. This search engine could simply help a person narrow down which book they would like to read, and they could either purchase it or borrow it from the library. As for "fair use", permission and profit are definitely not essential components located in the law of copyrighted work. Fair use, in this case, is the fact that Google has created an innovative tool that would help many researchers and book-lovers. As for the marketing component of law 17 USC 107, the Publishing companies have themselves admitted that no loss has been and will be made in terms of monetary value. They simply want to gain a share of the pie. Going further, this technological development can help preserve culture and human evolution in two ways: 1 is by allowing users to view the oldest pieces of literatures that are no longer in print and 2 is by allowing users to gain knowledge and respect for cultural differences, as Google has promised to integrate not only English-based texts, but other international texts as well. Surprisingly, Yahoo and MSN, Google's major competitors support Google in this issue, stating that Google's innovation is of little difference with what all search engines are currently doing. They believe that "fair use" does not need permission, nor does it defy profit. They believe that questioning Google's integrity with this matter is equal to questioning the validity of all search engines.
My opinion:
I am personally in favour of the Google Book Search not because I love Google, and not because it has helped me enhance my academic knowledge through research, but because of the following (supported by the facts that I have enlisted above):
Google has not violated the Copyright law and has, in my opinion, followed "fair use" all througout. I believe that Google should be respected due to the fact that they are willing to negotiate with the Publishing companies and authors in order to determine which and how much information should be scanned for each individual books. I also respect this development because it can sincerely help audiences learn about the past and present American culture and evolution, as well as break our cultural boundaries with other countries as we get to read about their lifestyles and literary techniques. One effect that this could do is increase the database for plagiarism, but do remind yourself that plagiarism has always been present and will always be present. A positive effect with this new access to book informations is the promotion of reading books, especially to the younger populations, as well as the advertisement of books that are copyrighted and still in print. One negative effect, however, may be the threat to librarians. It is true that there might be a slight drop in the amount of people who rely on the library because the books that are open to the public and are not copyrighted will be fully scanned onto the Google database. People may prefer to simply stay at home and read an entire book on the computer. However, copyrighted books that are no longer in print will only be presented as snippets in the Internet, and people will still need to rely on the public library for these hard copies. Also, it is a fact that people would want to prevent eyestrain from the extreme usage of the computer, and book lovers would prefer reading comfortably in a peaceful library. Also, it is a waste of ink and paper if people were to print these entire books rather than borrow them in the library for free. I am extremely persuaded that the librarians will not be affected at a far extent that their jobs would be of little significance. In conclusion, I really do support Google's innovation.
1 comment:
I agree on your analysis. Google is a trusted company that should be accepted among all. Google Book Search will benefit all parties. If the opposition thinks that it's a breach of privacy, there would no search engines in the first place.
Post a Comment