Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 14th Nov 2013 16:37 UTC

Google has won a resounding victory in its eight-year copyright battle with the Authors Guild over the search giant's controversial decision to scan more than 20 million library and make the available on the internet.

In a ruling (embedded below) issued Thursday morning in New York, US Circuit Judge Denny Chin said the book scanning amounted to fair use because it was "highly transformative" and because it didn't harm the market for the original work.

"Google Books provides significant public benefits," writes Chin, describing it as "an essential research tool" and noting that the scanning service has expanded literary access for the blind and helped preserve the text of old books from physical decay.

Too much common sense. I'm not sure I can handle this.

Permalink for comment 576930
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Evidence
by Yoko_T on Sat 16th Nov 2013 11:14 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Evidence"
Member since:


[q]"Because how can Google know which excerpts of a book a scholar wants to quote?"

If the scholar has a copy of the book, he can quote whatever he wants.

And most scholars don't have the money to own all the books they need. Nor can they afford to fly to other countries for the books they need. Nor can scholars do a textual search of books in a short amount of time.

""Public libraries would also be prohibited from doing their public service because what are they doing but making full copies available for free and supposedly "stealing" a sale (that never would have eventuated were it not for the free sampling)."

Libraries are specifically codified into copyright law to permit them to exist and loan out legitimate copies of books, but they don't really have more rights with respect to copying. I'm not sure if this is different in other countries, but in the US we are not automatically entitled to copy full works at the library. Both the library and the patron can be liable for copyright infringement. Unless there are outstanding factors having to do with lack of availability from the publisher, only typical fair use copies are permitted.

And neither is Google letting people copy the full work. They have the full copy of the work, just like a library does, and then people use those full copies of the work in a fair use way, just like they do with the full copies at the library.

""Which is why I said right at the very beginning that claims like this need evidence."

Well, the logic was inherently true, if keeping full text copies had no value for google, then google would not have a reason to fight for keeping full text copies, ergo it has value to them. The price of which could have been determined on the free market before this ruling set it's value at 0.

No one said there was no value to Google. The argument is that it decreases the value to others, which you haven't proven, and evidence suggesting it is bunk. As far as I can tell, your argument here is a strawman, since no one is saying this has no value to anyone, but I'm open to being corrected.

""This legal action has been going on for 8 years. Public libraries have been around for hundreds of years. The book industry has never collapsed since being invented."

It depends on exactly what you mean, the physical book industry is in very real danger. I only know of one remaining local bookstore selling used books, the rest have vanished. Obviously some of that is offset by gains in digital media. Maybe we the public are better off now, I donno I'm tired ;)

And exactly what I mean is "book industry". The form doesn't matter. The horse and buggy carriage industry collapsed after the invention of buses, but the transportation industry has not.

At no point is society obligated to keep all historical forms of technology alive just because some people can't adapt. Only just what was possible before is possible now.

The fact that Kindles and ebooks sell really well these days means the book industry is thriving. [/q]

No,it means that people are basically stupid. 5-10 years from now, you won't be able to read or view any of the "content" you bought for that Kindle,Ipad or pretty much any other ebook reader, due to the fact you won't be able to find a replacement battery for the unit, the hardware died, and there's nothing around that's compatible with the formats it used and so forth and so on.

Reply Parent Score: 1