amazon sends a note to google books.. we hate you.

[Abecedary]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

What I'm a little confused about is that if you were not part of the Plaintiffs, then how does this settlement apply? A group of Plaintiffs sued for copyright infringement, and then they settled with Google. If you were not part of that original case, then why can't you, as an author, also sue Google for copyright infringement. How is somebody completely independent of the original case forced to agree with the terms of the settlement?

From what I know about the case, if you aren't represented by one of the Plaintiffs, you CAN still sue Google. The whole point of the opt-out process is that members of the Author's Guild (and the other groups represented in the class-action suit) must opt out by tomorrow IF they want to be able to sue Google on their own (or as part of another class). If they don't opt out, then they waive their rights to sue later on. Again, this is only if you are already part of the suit. As for people saying it hasn't been long enough, the original settlement was made almost a year ago. If you were already part of the class action suit (again, the only people this whole settlement affects), then you were notified of it a long time ago.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Abecedary

From what I know about the case, if you aren't represented by one of the Plaintiffs, you CAN still sue Google. The whole point of the opt-out process is that members of the Author's Guild (and the other groups represented in the class-action suit) must opt out by tomorrow IF they want to be able to sue Google on their own (or as part of another class). If they don't opt out, then they waive their rights to sue later on. Again, this is only if you are already part of the suit. As for people saying it hasn't been long enough, the original settlement was made almost a year ago. If you were already part of the class action suit (again, the only people this whole settlement affects), then you were notified of it a long time ago.

Exactly. I think a lot of people talking about this as if it were some big problem and taking away the rights of authors, don't really understand the details.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

What I'm a little confused about is that if you were not part of the Plaintiffs, then how does this settlement apply?

It's how class action lawsuits work. Per the FAQ on the settlement:

"Who is included in this Settlement? The class consists of all persons and entities that, as of January 5, 2009, own a U.S. copyright interest in one or more Books or Inserts that are "implicated by a use" authorized by the Settlement.... If you remain in the class [i.e. did not opt out by 9/4/09], you will be bound by any judgment or determination of the Court in connection with the Settlement, whether favorable or unfavorable."

I.e. any author whose book is published before 1/5/09 and was/is scanned by Google is automatically included, unless they opted out by today. The only way you can start your own lawsuit is if you opted out (or if the settlement is killed).

The "class" in this case is not limited to the listed plaintiffs; they're just acting on behalf of the class. There is no limitation of the Settlement to just the members of the Author's Guild or AAP.

Keeping in mind that I am not a litigator : Such is the nature of a class action lawsuit. The idea is to streamline litigation, reduce court time and costs, relieve witnesses from participating in numerous near-identical trials, and avoid a situation where a plaintiff would receive conflicting requirements or instructions from multiple courts and/or decisions.


One aspect I missed though: In going over the FAQ, authors do have the option to ask Google not to include their books in the project even if they opted in to the Settlement (by choice or by not taking action). Presumably this will also allow the author / publisher to negotiate individually with Google for compensation rates. The main element is that after today, if you didn't opt out then you lose the right to sue Google for copyright infringement, if the settlement goes through.

So it's not quite as bad as I thought, but the fundamental issue remains that it does apparently create a special exemption for Google and tramples the author's and publisher's copyrights. I'm sure the situation can be salvaged somehow, and things could be worse, but I don't think this settlement is the best answer that can be reached.

[astra]

Kindle is the best ebook reader which consists of: the best content the easiest way to obtain the content for Average Joe.
Yes, I dislike kindle for many different reasons but I have more than passing knowledge of computers. For Average Joe there is nothing better than Kindle so far. The moment Amazon introduces Kindle in EU, they will immediately win the market.
So, google or not, free classic content is not the king of content. The latest bestsellers is the King of content.

[Abecedary]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

The "class" in this case is not limited to the listed plaintiffs; they're just acting on behalf of the class. There is no limitation of the Settlement to just the members of the Author's Guild or AAP.

Thanks for the clarification, Kali. I wonder if it will be decided that this settlement is fair for the "class" since so many people are potentially involved.

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

I'm not sure why you think it's exclusive to Google?

Start your own company, do exactly what google did, get sued for copyright infringement, and then settle out of court.

The settlement is exclusive to Google.

Trying to duplicate what they did is stupid in a business sense. It's not profitable to repeat. And no, you can't sue seperately - check out the objections to it which explain why the settlement is a landgrab.


zerospinboson - Actually, the two orgs involved have arround 8,000 authors between them. Total. It's a landgrab.

[zerospinboson]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Trying to duplicate what they did is stupid in a business sense. It's not profitable to repeat.

Do clarify these assertions.

[GeoffC]

Google books looks as though it could be a laudable enterprise, but the format of the end product (from what little I've seen) is a scan of a book placed on-line. This means you can read an entire book, BUT only from an Internet-connected computer - i.e. not available for upload to a dedicated reading device ....

They currently hold 2,679 Scifi titles...(google.co.uk)

[zerospinboson]

FT reports google is trying to appease european publishers, and saying it will negotiate with them before making available European-printed books:

A spokesperson for Google on Monday said: ”The parties to the Settlement Agreement have sent a letter to several national publisher associations in Europe to clarify that books that are commercially available in Europe will be treated as commercially available under the Settlement. Such books can only be displayed to US users if expressly authorised by rights holders.”

The European Commission is holding hearings on Monday on how it should respond to the deal. The 27-member bloc is trying to work out whether legislation is required to facilitate the digitisation of European culture.

Google’s concessions, in a statement signed by representatives of authors and publishers with whom it is negotiating the class-action settlement, are designed to give more control to European rights-holders nervous about the exploitation of their work in the US.

[DawnFalcon]

Except...is that an undertaking (to be broken when convenient) or an actual proposed change in the settlement?

[zerospinboson]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Except...is that an undertaking (to be broken when convenient) or an actual proposed change in the settlement?

Considering the EU council is considering it, I'm hazarding a guess it's not something they could renege unilaterally.

[Kali Yuga]

Man, this settlement is awfully complex....

I can't tell from the FAQ if the term "Commercially Available" is based on certain sovereign boundaries, or if the agreement has any force in Europe. I would assume Google will need to modify the text of the Settlement to extend the "Commercially Available" category to cover books that are in-print in Europe but not the US, in which case it would be permanently binding.

Also, while this settlement is exclusive to Google, it does not grant Google exclusive rights to scan, store, share etc out-of-print books. But it is unclear if another company that engages in a similar scanning project would automatically be granted the same rights as the Google Settlement, or if it would require a whole separate agreement. Yet another reason why this would probably be better off legislated than settled in court....

[nekokami]

How would you legislate something like this internationally? Add it as an amendment somehow to the Berne Convention? Apparently the Convention has been revised every 10-20 years since its inception, with the last revision in 1979, so I suppose we're due. I just hope we don't get even longer copyright extensions at the same time.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

It's how class action lawsuits work. Per the FAQ on the settlement:

"Who is included in this Settlement? The class consists of all persons and entities that, as of January 5, 2009, own a U.S. copyright interest in one or more Books or Inserts that are "implicated by a use" authorized by the Settlement.... If you remain in the class [i.e. did not opt out by 9/4/09], you will be bound by any judgment or determination of the Court in connection with the Settlement, whether favorable or unfavorable."

I.e. any author whose book is published before 1/5/09 and was/is scanned by Google is automatically included, unless they opted out by today. The only way you can start your own lawsuit is if you opted out (or if the settlement is killed).

Yes, I know how class action lawsuits work. I'd be curious to see who the members of the class are in the legal filings though, not just in a FAQ from Google.

[Grandma Aubbie]

"Microsoft Slams Google Book Deal"

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2352583,00.asp

Their reasoning:
[Microsoft argued that the deal would hinder its own business.

"Microsoft was and remains interested in search technology to improve access to digital books, an interest that would be substantially harmed by approval of the proposed settlement," the company said.

In May 2008, Microsoft shut down Live Search Books, its own e-book effort. The project started in December 2006, and managed to digitize 750,000 books and index 80 million journal articles – none of which were scanned without permission from the copyright holder, Microsoft said.]

It seems those most concerned with Google having a monopoly are also those who are most invested in monopolizing ...