8,000 authors sue Google
p2p news / p2pnet:- More than 8,000 authors are accusing Google of “massive copyright infringement”.
The authors’ works are in public and university libraries and haven`t been licensed for commercial use, the Author’s Guild said in a class action, according to the Associated Press, which goes on to quote the authors as saying Google, by reproducing for itself a copy of those works that aren`t in the public domain, has infringed, and continues to infringe, the electronic rights of the copyright holders of those works.
Google knew, or should have known, copyright laws call for authorization from copyright owners of literary works to create and reproduce digital copies for its own commercial use, but, “Despite this knowledge, Google has unlawfully reproduced the works and has announced plans to reproduce and display the works without the copyright holders’ authorization,” the class action says, according to AP.
The company`s library project means it`ll scan and index publications from the New York public library, Harvard, Stanford, Michigan and Oxford and, as AP points out, the Michigan and Stanford libraries had agreed to submit all of their material.
However, Google`s plans have met with stiff opposition from the word Go in another example of a giant American corporation imposing its will on not only organizations, but entire countries, describing loud and sustained objections to its Google Print book scan as healthy discussion.
Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net
See:-
Associated Press – Authors Hit Google With Copyright Lawsuit, September 20, 2005
sustained objections – Google Print opens its doors, September 2, 2005
September 21st, 2005 at 4:07 pm
Not a chance of getting a verdict agaisnt an infringer without the right connections, regarless of the merits of the case.
Hear my experience.
A publisher stole over 500 songs (in 1996) that belong to my brother and sisters (an inheritance), claimed them as their own, licensed all of them t radio stations, licensed over 16 recordings that were actually produced, received over $127,680.47 (current worth is $240,000) in illegal royalties.
The court agrees we are the owners of the rights but decided that there was no infringement except for a single one for a single song of the 500+ infringed songs and awarded us $16,000 in damages. In essence of the $240,000 (current worth) of money illegally received as confirmed by the court, the punishment to the music publisher (Latin American Music Company – LAMCO) is to return to us $16,000 and keep the rest ($224,000). WHAT A PUNISHMENT FOR THE THEFT AND HIJACKING OF OVER 500 SONGS FOR 9 YEARS.
In the meantime no one believes we are the real owners and do not accept licenses from us, even for free. And the songs are among the best songs ever written.
Just last friday (Sept. 16. 2005) the First Circuit Appeals at Boston ratified the lower court decision that there was no infringement (except for the one song).
There is no way anyone can get justice in this legal system.
The court decisions and my analysis are posted at my web page:
http://www.gvenegas.com
Please spread the word.
Rafael Venegas
September 22nd, 2005 at 2:08 am
An organization with 8000 members suing is not the same as 8000 people making a choice to sue. As we are finding out in Canada with Access Copyright (a royalty collection agency for Canadian authors), few if any of the author members of these organizations are ever being asked their opinion on these issues.
There are authors that are coming out against these organizations in Canada, and I suspect that slowly the same thing will happen worldwide.
Example:
Freelance journalist Pippa Wysong speaks out about Access Copyright lobbying
http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/1072
September 25th, 2005 at 3:40 am
I’m not sure you’ve thought this through. These books were written for people to read. Books do you (yes, you, the public) no good sitting on shelves where you can’t access them.
Google is doing a public good. We all benefit from greater access to information.
Google is not making these books available to read, download or print from the Internet. Merely search, that is, if the information you want is in that book, you still won’t be able to read it unless you go down to the library and check it out.
I’m sure the priests in the Dark Ages weren’t thrilled when the public got access to mass-produced Bibles and started learning to read – before that point the priest had the power of salvation (i.e. all the power). Welcome to the Information Age.