DoJ Launches Antitrust Case Against Google
Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: Department, of, Justice, Google, Antitrust | Themes: The Internet, Business
The Justice Department is said to be making inquiries in relation to Google’s settlement with the Authors Guild of America last October.
The New York Times today reports that lawyers for the Department of Justice notified the parties of the settlement, including Google, and representatives for the Association of American Publishers and the Authors Guild, that they were looking into various antitrust issues related to the far-reaching agreement.
The Authors Guild took legal action against the search giant after Google struck deals with major university libraries to scan and copy millions of books in their collections claiming the digitizing of the books represented a “fair use” of the material. Roy Blount Jr explained that while many of these were older books in the public domain, millions of others were still under copyright protection. The Guild said Google’s scanning was “a plain and brazen violation of copyright law.”
Last October Google, the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers announced that the three had come to an agreement with regard to already scanned copyright protected books and laid out prospective plans for future revenues. Google said it would give payments totaling $125 million with the money being used cover legal fees as well as establish the Book Rights Registry, aimed at resolving existing claims by authors and publishers.
At the time of settlement, Blount said that rights holders would receive a share of revenues from institutional subscriptions to the collection of books made available through Google Book Search under the settlement. On top of that, they would also receive a share of revenues garnered from sales of online consumer access to the books and be paid for printouts at public libraries.
According to the NYT, who cites people briefed on the matter, the Justice Department will not necessarily oppose the settlement and the inquiry is a result of complaints made by concerned critics who say the settlement would give Google an exclusive license to profit from millions of books.
-
Previous News Article
Report: Pre to Steal New... -
Next News Article
Adobe: We're Fixing the Acrobat...
its the about the time...
Is this the first time that Google takes a antitrust case? If it is, Google, welcome to the winning world!
READ: Microsoft or Yahoo
It's about time that text books be digitized and offered as such to students. However, I also don't like seeing Google get some kind of monopoly over this.
READ: Microsoft or Yahoo
Not necessarily. This could also come from any/all bookstore owners who feel their grip on hard copies would slip away if people were able to do a google search and pull up their literature of choice.
Sure, there's the Kindle which allows people to download books and read electronically, but Google's approach requires people to only have a computer and internet connection and not a specialized device like the Kindle.
As far as Google getting "an exclusive license to profit," isn't that the benefit of coming up with an idea and implementing it yourself?
well, that major infringement on copyright law, seam alot like they where being sneaky. almost as if they planned this and the settlement long before they got in trouble over it. just to not stir up debate asking 1,000 of publishers and authers. thus this allowed them to move quickly.
but about an anti-trust suit that seems kinda stupid unless im not understanding something. but ok google finds a way to profit but if other companies like msn or yahho wanted to do it they could to.
It is one thing to digitize a copyrighted item. It is another thing to make a profit from it. There is nothing wrong with me digitizing my own library of books. There is also nothing wrong with me sharing this copy with someone who also owns a particular book I digitized. I just save them the effort. It becomes something completely different when I take that digitized item and put it up on the web for all to see in full light of day, and even have the gall to put advertisements next to it so that I make money everytime someone visits the site to read. Yes libraries put books out where people can read them, free of charge and in unlimited, except by viture of time, numbers, and it is that limited virtue of time that makes it fair use. Because a library has limited copies and people have limited time to read those copies, it falls under fair use.
Not necessarily. This could also come from any/all bookstore owners who feel their grip on hard copies would slip away if people were able to do a google search and pull up their literature of choice.Sure, there's the Kindle which allows people to download books and read electronically, but Google's approach requires people to only have a computer and internet connection and not a specialized device like the Kindle.As far as Google getting "an exclusive license to profit," isn't that the benefit of coming up with an idea and implementing it yourself?
It was a joke...not to mention a google search will already do that for tons of hard copy and online content alike. Whether its pointing to a pdf from another source, google books, a torrent, or otherwise.
Also, to get the DoJ to do an investigation in which they claim they are basically "just curious" sounds to me like it would take much more than a few authors and bookstore owners writing complaint letters about lost revenue. I mean aren't these the folks that usually raid offices with armed teams? Considering the apparent lack of merit for anything other than a mild poking around from the DoJ I'd say they were appeasing either a large group or many many smaller entities that complained.
Two of the biggest groups in the literature world just signed a deal that nets them and their authors millions. I don't think they'd throw the income stream away they just went to court for. You do the math...whos left that cares enough to contact the DoJ?
I was actually joking about MS or yahoo being the ones complaining but unless it was B&N and Borders bookstores I don't know who is left that cares enough and has that kind of weight. I don't think the theory it was a bunch of indie bookstore owners covers it.
Surprise surprise, the master is against serfs reading and learning. We elected our overlord and it is time to slave.
Google Book Search is an awesome service.
The article states: "the inquiry is a result of complaints made by concerned critics who say the settlement would give Google an exclusive license to profit from millions of books."
So none of these books will be available in printed form? No used copies out there anywhere? Is Google supervising the destruction of all other forms of these books to ensure they really have a monopoly?
Sorry, but I don't see this "exclusive license" that the critics are talking about. Can someone explain their basis for this - really explain it, not just guessing?