Quote:
Originally Posted by igorsk
Actually, Microsoft was trying it too, but they went for opt-in instead of opt-out. Maybe that's why they couldn't compete with Google.
|
That's exactly why they couldn't compete. I won't waste time debating the legality of what Google did, I'll just say that I believe they chose the only course that had a realistic chance of success.
If your aim is to digitise all book content and make it searchable there is no point setting it up as an opt-in system, and there is no point at all trying to negotiate with rights holders directly for access to the content they hold under lock and key. Too many would refuse to participate or demand unreasonable royalties.
No, the only way to succeed in such a project is to go ahead and do it and then, afterwards, dictate the licensing terms to the rights-holders, with the force of an almost unlimited budget for legal defence backing you up.
It may seem like foul play to the rights holders but tough! Had they been willing to keep to the original spirit of copyright (by allowing works to fall into the public domain within a reasonable time frame) then such drastic measures would not have been necessary. They broke the contract first, to their benefit and to the detriment of the public. Google has broken the contract again, only this time it is the public that stands to benefit and the rights holders that lose out.