Wait, wait, we’ll share what we stole!
The Register’s invaluable Cade Metz unpacks a desperate Google’s latest “gift” to a wary world. The smell emanating from this generous offer is, in the theater, known as flop sweat:
Google invites Amazon to resell ebook boondoggle
No thanks, say Amazon
By Cade Metz in San Francisco
Hoping to allay fears that its $125m library-scanning settlement would deliver far too much power over the fledgling digital-book market, Google has told Congress it will give competitors access to its online texts.
“Google will host the digital books online, and retailers such as Amazon, Barnes & Noble or your local bookstore will be able to sell access to users on any Internet-connected device they choose,” company chief legal officer David Drummond said during a US Congressional hearing this morning. This reseller program would apply to a planned service called Google Editions.
The announcement made (many) headlines, from Reuters to The Wall Street Journal to Cnet. But it’s worth noting this sort of affiliate program is already discussed in Google’s 134-page settlement. And the offer would only apply if the controversial pact wins approval.
“Google’s announcement today that it would give retailers access to out of print books via Google Editions is much ado about nothing,” said the Internet Archive’s Peter Brantley, speaking on behalf of the Open Book Alliance, a group that opposes the Google settlement.
“If Google Editions ever comes to fruition — and it’s pure vaporware right now — it doesn’t address the fundamental problems with the Settlement that so many have cited, including the fact that Google would still have sole control over access to the books, and shoppers would still be subjected to questionable and undefined privacy policies.”
Under its pending settlement with American authors and publishers, Google would get 37 per cent of the revenue from digital books sold through its online book service, and Drummond said that competitors would share much of this revenue with the resellers. But the texts would still be housed on Google’s service, and Google would be the sole option for accessing these digital titles.
[snip]
As reported by CNet, when questioned about Google’s announcement, Amazon – a member of the Open Book Alliance – indicated it has no interest in the Editions reseller program. “The Internet has never been about intermediation,” said Paul Misener, Amazon’s vice president of global policy. “We’re happy to work with rights holders without anybody else’s help.”
read the rest via Google invites Amazon to resell ebook boondoggle • The Register.
No license to steal.
People who understand copyright understand that the Google Books deal is illegal:
Copyright Office Assails Google’s Settlement on Digital Books
By MIGUEL HELFT
SAN FRANCISCO — The nation’s top copyright official made a blistering attack Thursday on a controversial legal settlement that would let Google create a huge online library and bookstore.
Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, Marybeth Peters, the United States register of copyrights, said the settlement between Google and groups representing authors and publishers amounted to an end-run around copyright law that would wrest control of books from authors and other right holders.
Ms. Peters, the first government official to address the settlement in detail, said it would allow Google to profit from the work of others without prior consent and that it could put “diplomatic stress” on the United States because it affected foreign authors whose rights are protected by international treaties.
[snip]
Ms. Peters said that in granting something like a “compulsory license,” a requirement that rights owners license works to others, the settlement essentially usurped the authority of Congress and skirted deliberations.
“In essence, the proposed settlement would give Google a license to infringe first and ask questions later, under the imprimatur of the court,” Ms. Peters wrote in her prepared testimony.
Her opinion is important because it could be reflected in a brief expected from the Justice Department this month.
[more] via Top Copyright Official Assails Google Book Settlement – NYTimes.com.
That “Trust Us” mantra doesn’t seem to be working anymore.
Even people who don’t object to Google’s basic idea are worried about their cavalier attitude towards privacy:
National Coalition of Authors Urge Rejection of Google Book Search Deal | Electronic Frontier Foundation
New York – A coalition of authors and publishers—including best-sellers Michael Chabon, Jonathan Lethem, and technical author Bruce Schneier—is urging a federal judge to reject the proposed settlement in a lawsuit over Google Book Search, arguing that the sweeping agreement to digitize millions of books ignores critical privacy rights for readers and writers.
The group of more than two dozen authors and publishers, represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the Samuelson Law, Technology, and Public Policy Clinic at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law (Samuelson clinic), filed an objection to the settlement today. The coalition is concerned that Google’s collection of personal identifying information about users who browse, read, and make purchases online at Google Book Search will chill their readership.
“Google Book Search and other digital book projects will redefine the way people read and research,” said Lethem, winner of a National Book Critics Circle Award. “Now is the moment to make sure that Google Book Search is as private as the world of physical books. If future readers know that they are leaving a digital trail for others to follow, they may shy away from important intellectual journeys.”
The settlement, currently pending approval from a New York federal district court, would end the legal challenges brought by the Authors’ Guild over the Google Book Search project. It would give Google the green light to scan and digitize millions of books and allow users to search for and read those books online. However, Google’s system could monitor what books users search for, how much of the books they read, and how long they spend on various pages. Google could then combine information about readers’ habits and interests with additional information it collects from other Google services, creating a massive “digital dossier” that would be vulnerable to fishing expeditions by law enforcement or civil litigants.
[more] via National Coalition of Authors Urge Rejection of Google Book Search Deal | Electronic Frontier Foundation.
They’re right to be worried: see “Anonymized” data really isn’t—and here’s why not from Ars Technica. Google’s promises to “remove personally identifying information” are worthless.
