View Single Post
Old 08-21-2009, 08:31 PM   #17
reader22
Enthusiast
reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.reader22 understands the importance of being earnest.
 
Posts: 27
Karma: 145086
Join Date: Aug 2009
Device: none
It's not just orphan works that were going to be digitized. It is all works. Google came up with a deal with the Authors Guild et al who took it upon themselves to negotiate an opt out instead of an opt in for all authors - whether they were a member of the guild or not. Why should an author who holds the copyright to something have to opt out? If you hold the copyright to something and someone uses it without your permission isn't that infringement? Also there was some talk about how if you hadn't filed a copyright form with the US copyright office - google would scan it anyway whether you opted out or not. It's not just MS etc who are against Google's digitization - a lot of authors, agents, and publishers are as well. If google wants to digitize books fine but they should be required to negotiate individually with each and every single copyright holder.
reader22 is offline   Reply With Quote