Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Wins Appeals Court Approval of Book-Scanning Project

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 88 posts

Re: Google Wins Appeals Court Approval of Book-Scanning Project

#41

Post by dragonwriter »

NiftyFifty wrote: post #23

Since when does the right of the owner shift to the consumer with respect to artistic creation? This sets off all kinds of red flags on all things created. The view is narrow, and lacks a broader view on the scope of artists in particular - namely photographers!

> Since when does the right of the owner shift to the consumer with respect to artistic creation?

It doesn't. However, this isn't about rights shifting from the owner of a copyright interests to someone else, its about power to exclude particular uses that the owner of a copyright interest never had (note that statutory fair use is largely a codification of pre-existing case law on fair use which was grounded in the First Amendment, and so generally addresses powers that not only the copyright owner never had under the law, but powers which Congress could not give the copyright holder, because doing so would violate an explicit Constitutional limitation on the powers of Congress.)

Re: Google Wins Appeals Court Approval of Book-Scanning Project

#42

Post by heimatau »

I think it's important to mention that Google only returns 'snippets' of the text. The entire book is searchable and indexed but Google book-scanning project prevents use to read the entire book. The court ruled this is fair use since it enables the searcher to find out if the searched book has substantial information regarding their research/searching.

Re: Google Wins Appeals Court Approval of Book-Scanning Project

#43

Post by ap22213 »

I'm not sure that I agree with this ruling.

Although Google says that they're using it for one specific purpose, I can imagine that they'll use it for other things like improving their search and ad technologies. If that's the case, then wouldn't Google's work be considered derivative of the original content?

Why should the authors involved not be able to re-sell those digitalized versions to other companies (especially other search engines)? There are probably lots of companies that would like that data set and be willing to pay for the use of it (including me).

Re: Google Wins Appeals Court Approval of Book-Scanning Project

#46

Post by panarky »

baldfat wrote: post #4

As a former librarian I say YES! The typical librarian actually doesn't fight for the access of materials but fights to enforce copy right stricter than the copy right law even calls for. At my college I took down the sign that said "No Copying of Books" at the photo copier and I put in place the actual copy right law. I can't tell you how many visiting librarians were "shocked" I did that. Well we also allowed bottl…

From page 12 of the actual ruling[1]:

  The Law of Fair Use: The ultimate goal of copyright is to expand
  public knowledge and understanding ... while authors are undoubtedly
  important intended beneficiaries of copyright, the ultimate,
  primary intended beneficiary is the public ...
[1] https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2461545/agvgoogle... [PDF]

Re: Google Wins Appeals Court Approval of Book-Scanning Project

#47

Post by joering2 »

heimatau wrote: post #42

I think it's important to mention that Google only returns 'snippets' of the text. The entire book is searchable and indexed but Google book-scanning project prevents use to read the entire book. The court ruled this is fair use since it enables the searcher to find out if the searched book has substantial information regarding their research/searching.

One could wonder if the same rule would apply to music.

Would it be okay to have 30 seconds of any song available free online, just so that you could search for a lyrics of the song you heard on the radio, and then match it with 30 sec audio clip to find out whether the song is the one you were looking for.

Re: Google Wins Appeals Court Approval of Book-Scanning Project

#48

Post by dingaling »

baldfat wrote: post #15
toomuchtodo wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, thanks for being a librarian. Second, I don't think traditional librarians know how quickly the end is coming. Libraries will still exist of course, possibly as makerspaces, possibly as community centers, but with collections like "Library Genesis" [+] and storage continually to plummet in price, in the next 5 years entire libraries could be carried in your pocket. EDIT: I'm not saying librarians aren't necess…

In my opinions librarians are actually needed more now! Yes we have a fire hose of content and people need people like librarians to help utilize that fire hose more. When I left (I quit the job) being a librarian in 2008 more than 50% of librarians had lost their jobs in the next 2 years. Most people who handle budgets have your same idea. My school district of 19,000 students had ONE librarian for all the elementar…

> people need people like librarians to help utilize that fire hose more

Given the explosion of niche interests over the past 50 years I don't think its feasible for librarians to provide that service except at extremes of the spectrum: internal university or corporate information of extreme specificity and controlled scope at one end, and public topics of general specificity at the other.

In the middle is a vast information space traditionally only explored and indexed by clubs and societies but now predominantly by the search engines.

Think about asking your local public librarian about functional programming, or the history of turbine-powered cars. They'll have to refer to a index of recommended texts[0] and hope there's something vaguely similar there, which is far inferior to a search engine which can access vast reservoirs of specialist discussion on such specific topics.

[0] I can't remember the name of this index after all this time but it lists 'go-to' references for a long list of topics.

Re: Google Wins Appeals Court Approval of Book-Scanning Project

#49

Post by dtparr »

tokenadult wrote: post #2

It's good that this news report includes a citation to the case decision at the end of the article. That citation is Authors Guild v. Google Inc., 13-4829, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (Manhattan) The ruling applies, of course, only to the United States, and only if it is not reversed by the United States Supreme Court. But I think the argument that Google's use of the book content is not market-destr…

Since precedent-wise, it only applies in the Second Circuit (CT, VT, and NY), I wonder if there are any similar cases (or if there's another entity that might try their luck against Google elsewhere, say in the 9th Cir.) that might result in either an a concurrence with the 2nd, or a split that would 'force' SCOTUS to weigh in.

Re: Google Wins Appeals Court Approval of Book-Scanning Project

#50

Post by brianpan »

mangeletti wrote: post #16
baldfat wrote: post #4

As a former librarian I say YES! The typical librarian actually doesn't fight for the access of materials but fights to enforce copy right stricter than the copy right law even calls for. At my college I took down the sign that said "No Copying of Books" at the photo copier and I put in place the actual copy right law. I can't tell you how many visiting librarians were "shocked" I did that. Well we also allowed bottl…

This is awesome. I can remember clearly, in junior high school, the librarian informing us that we were only allowed to copy six pages of a book for homework assignments. I don't really have a strong opinion on much of this (one way or the other), because I'm not well enough informed on the topic, but I remember feeling weird about it, becaus the library aid made us feel like criminals for wanting to copy more than 6…

Did you have to pay for copies? If you were in junior high, I would assume that the 6 page limit is a cost limiting measure.
Post reply on HN