Google Book Project

[Geoffrey S. Nathan]

Jonathan wrote

> Google Books used to explain that its purpose was less to help you
> find infiormation than to lead you to books you would be eager to buy
> from participating sellers.  This frank admission seems to have been
> dropped, or rephrased in a more soothing manner.  One sentence even
> attempted to promote the ensuing difficulties as some kind of bonus:
> research, "but with a Google twist !"
>
>   That sentence has also been dropped, the responsible spin-doctor
> destined (one hopes) for a special griddle in Hell.
OK, I'm going to defend Google here.  Be aware that I'm wearing my IT
Policy hat here, not my Linguist hat.  Google is (I believe) doing the
world a favor by scanning these books.  But they are under extreme
pressure to stop.  The pressure comes from some, but not all, parts of
the publishing industry, which believes that if all books are digitized,
no one will buy books any more, and artists will starve.  Or something.
Anyway, you can read about it in any number of places (references
supplied upon request--Pat Schroeder is the name of one of the major
spokesmen for).
So, Google is defending its project by, in part, arguing that having
access to content through searches actually INCREASES sales of books,
and is therefore not the moral equivalent of shoplifting (which
Schroeder and others argue).

So, give Google a break--their increased sales spin is, at least in
part, on our behalf.  I can supply a very interesting ppt presentation
by one of the lawyers at U Michigan who was here a month or so ago
making this argument.  He's pretty radical, but he makes a good case.
Let me know and I can make it available.

Geoff

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org