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

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.

Thread beginning with comment 576839
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Not completely convinced
by bentoo on Thu 14th Nov 2013 18:51 UTC in reply to "Not completely convinced"
bentoo
Member since:
2012-09-21

...it's also the first time that a work of an author can be used by Google *without* any permission of the creator of the work.

A dangerous precedent me thinks.


Not a dangerous precedent, but fair use. Google isn't sharing the entire text of copyrighted work (without permission) but merely a snippit. This is really the same as a brick and mortar store allowing you to browse a book before buying.

Edited 2013-11-14 18:52 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: Not completely convinced
by Alfman on Thu 14th Nov 2013 19:21 in reply to "RE: Not completely convinced"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

bentoo,

It sure does seem like there is a lot of new precedent:

Google creates more than one copy of each book it scans from the library collections, and it maintains digital copies of each book on its servers and back-up tapes. (Google Resp. ¶¶ 40,41). Participating libraries have downloaded digital copies of in-copyright books scanned from their collections.

...

Google did not seek or obtain permission from the copyright holders to digitally copy or display verbatim expressions from in-copyright books. (Google Resp. ¶¶ 53, 54). Google has not compensated copyright holders for its copying or for displaying of verbatim expression from in-copyright books or


Previously anyone making full unauthorized copies of copyrighted works (without owning the original, as in google's case) would have been a no-no, regardless of intent.

Now that google seems to have a public interest waiver, can I go do the exact same thing? Can I borrow books and music from friends, make full copies without authorization, and then keep full copies of them on my servers so long as I only redistribute fair use snippets myself?

Edited 2013-11-14 19:36 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

Now that google seems to have a public interest waiver, can I go do the exact same thing? Can I borrow books and music from friends, make full copies without authorization, and then keep full copies of them on my servers so long as I only redistribute fair use snippets myself?


Probably. As long as your use satisfies the four fair use factors (as the judge ruled Google's use did in this case).

Reply Parent Score: 2

galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

Previously anyone making full unauthorized copies of copyrighted works (without owning the original, as in google's case) would have been a no-no, regardless of intent.


Thats not exactly true. A teacher, for example, can make photocopies of a book to use a teaching materials (even one they do not own) and that at least can be acceptable fair use under the right circumstances.

Now that google seems to have a public interest waiver, can I go do the exact same thing? Can I borrow books and music from friends, make full copies without authorization, and then keep full copies of them on my servers so long as I only redistribute fair use snippets myself?


Why are you making the copies? If you are doing it just to read them, then it isn't fair use. In fact, regardless of why you do it, if you take advantage of the fact that you are doing it and read them it isn't fair use.

Reply Parent Score: 3