Google digitizing all books

[Anthony Anemone]

You might check out Robert Darnton's recent essay on this subject in the Feb
12, 2009 issue of the NYRB (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22281) entitled
"Google & the Future of Books."  In a word, the problem is that once Google
digitizes a book, it can charge what it likes (what the market will bear)
for access.   The recent settlement withpublishers appears to give Google
something close to monopoly rights to the digital copies in its library  -
and while I'm not an economist, I do know that monopolies don't have a great
record when it comes to keeping prices down.

Tony Anemone



On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Sasha Spektor <xrenovo at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Sarah,
> I'm sorry you find yourself in such a disadvantageous position:)  It's a
> personal opinion of mine -- i think information should belong to everyone.
> And it's not like google is stealing other people's ideas.  It's making
> them
> accessible.  Wouldn't you want your work to be read in places where your
> book cannot get to?  Let's even say that you can make some money by not
> allowing google to scan it.  But you are not writing for money, aren't you?
> You are writing to get tenure (unless you already have one), to express
> yourself, to formulate new and exciting ideas, etc.  The advantages of
> publishing work for academics are not monetary, or, at least, not in the
> copyright way.  You can get famous, known; you could get a good job because
> of your work, but it's unlikely that you would get paid for publishing it,
> no?  Your finantial enumeration comes from being paid by the university on
> a
> salary basis (I'm obviously assuming), not from publishing a book.  I'm
> sitting here at home, preparing a lecture for tomorrow and if I could get
> some additional information about it from scanned books on google, it would
> make my life and the life of my students so much better.  That's a
> utilitarian approach--and I'm not necessarily a proponent of one, but it
> also works.  That google is a huge corporation doesn't change the fact
> that--in my opinion--they are doing a truly amazing thing--a revolutionary
> thing equal in status to the creation of internet itself--by creating a
> digital library.  Objecting to that, I think, is similar to objecting to
> Bill Gates's efforts to eradicate malaria.  And sure we can spend endless
> hours arguing--Dmitry Nabokov-like--that the author has earned by his/her
> hard labor the right to be paid for the work done.  But to extend this
> argument to the publishing world of Slavists seems to me unnecessary.  Not
> to deprive our esteemed colleagues of this discussion just because you've
> exceeded the quota, I'm publishing this on Seelangs.  I just can't resist.
> All the best,
> S.
>
> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Sarah Hurst <sarahhurst at alaska.net> wrote:
>
> >  Hi Sasha,
> >
> >
> >
> > I have exceeded my quota of messages today on SEELANGS, but I’d be
> > interested to know why you think authors should give up their
> intellectual
> > copyright and allow a big corporation to take their work and publish it.
> If
> > you could add a clarifying message that would be good.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> >
> >
> > Sarah Hurst
> >
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
>  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
>                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>



-- 
Anthony Anemone
Chair & Associate Provost of Foreign Languages
The New School
212-229-5676 ex. 2355

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------