AE Monthly

<b>Bonhams:</b> MANDELSHTAM, OSIP. 1891-1938. Autograph Manuscript, 2 pp, [Petersburg,] January 1913, entitled

Article Archives Search

AE Articles


Objections Raised To Google Book Search (And This Time It's Not From Publishers) - By Michael Stillman The OCA motto, from video on their website. By Michael Stillman Not all institutions are pleased with Google or Microsoft's massive book scanning projects, and it is not for the reason most frequently raised, copyright violation. Google began a project of digitizing the contents of millions of old, mostly out of copyright books a few years ago. Microsoft has followed suit with its own project. The idea is to make the content of millions of virtually lost and forgotten old books available to everyone everywhere through the internet. However, Google long ago ran into major opposition from book publishers. While the publishers have raised no objection to the digitizing of out of copyright material (how could they?), Google has gone a step beyond by scanning material that may still be under copyright (all pre-1923 American books are out of copyright, but many later ones may or may not be depending on whether copyrights were renewed in the past). What has upset publishers is the fact that Google will show portions of protected material without first obtaining the copyright holder's permission. Google will remove books if the holder objects, but the publishers believe this is backwards, that permission must be obtained first before Google can display the books. Microsoft, which has been busy launching its own book search, has avoided this objection by scanning only out of copyright books or those for which it has received the copyright holder's permission. However, we now discover another objection has been raised to the Google and Microsoft projects, and this one comes not from publishers but from libraries. The New York Times, in its October 22 edition, reports that a number of libraries and institutions, including the Boston Public Library, a consortium of research and academic libraries including the Universities of Massachusetts and Connecticut, and the Smithsonian have withheld their books from Google's scanners. Instead, they are making their collections available only to the Open Content Alliance, another organization involved in the digitizing of old books, but unlike Google and Microsoft, a nonprofit association. Here is the issue. While Google and Microsoft scan the books in the institutional libraries at no charge to the cooperating institution, they place restrictions on how these digitized books may be viewed. Access to the texts is free, but the scanners require that the books be reached only through their respective search engines. So, if you want to view a book Google has scanned, you can only find it by using Google's search engine. You cannot access it through Microsoft or Yahoo's search engine. The same applies to books Microsoft has scanned and Microsoft's search engine.
Objections Raised To Google Book Search (And This Time It's Not From Publishers) - By Michael Stillman none The objecting institutions do not like to see private businesses controlling access to the world of knowledge contained in these books. This is despite the unquestionable fact that Google and Microsoft are doing researchers and readers a great favor by making vast amounts of knowledge readily available at their fingertips. In the past, huge amounts of time and work were required to reach this material, visiting many libraries, perhaps thousands of miles away, searching through their records, and obtaining permission to look at their old books (which might be denied). Google and Microsoft have made a difficult and laborious process very simple. They have provided us with instant access to the text of millions of old books and they don't even charge for it. So what is the issue? This process puts what was previously under the control of nonprofit, mostly public institutions, under the dominion of private, for profit ones. Their ultimate responsibility is to their shareholders, not the public. There is something unsettling about the thought that knowledge, once available equally to all through the public library system, could effectively be controlled by institutions created to make money for their shareholders. It is already a huge issue that most of our access to news is controlled by for-profit organizations whose financial interests may determine what we see, or how it is "spun." Could this also happen to all of our past knowledge as well? The objecting institutions are instead making their books available for scanning to the Open Content Alliance. The OCA is a nonprofit and places no restrictions on how its material may be accessed. It is placed on an open server where any search engine, Google and Microsoft included, may access it freely. It favors no one. However, there is a downside to this. The institutions must pay to have their books scanned. This is an expensive process with no Google or Microsoft to foot the bill. The institutions must find public-spirited contributors to finance the scanning, rather than accessing the enormous profits of Google and Microsoft. The result is this is a slower process for the OCA, resulting in a less complete database than those offered by their commercial counterparts.

Objections Raised To Google Book Search (And This Time It's Not From Publishers)

- By Michael Stillman

The OCA motto, from video on their website.

By Michael Stillman

Not all institutions are pleased with Google or Microsoft's massive book scanning projects, and it is not for the reason most frequently raised, copyright violation. Google began a project of digitizing the contents of millions of old, mostly out of copyright books a few years ago. Microsoft has followed suit with its own project. The idea is to make the content of millions of virtually lost and forgotten old books available to everyone everywhere through the internet. However, Google long ago ran into major opposition from book publishers.

While the publishers have raised no objection to the digitizing of out of copyright material (how could they?), Google has gone a step beyond by scanning material that may still be under copyright (all pre-1923 American books are out of copyright, but many later ones may or may not be depending on whether copyrights were renewed in the past). What has upset publishers is the fact that Google will show portions of protected material without first obtaining the copyright holder's permission. Google will remove books if the holder objects, but the publishers believe this is backwards, that permission must be obtained first before Google can display the books. Microsoft, which has been busy launching its own book search, has avoided this objection by scanning only out of copyright books or those for which it has received the copyright holder's permission.

However, we now discover another objection has been raised to the Google and Microsoft projects, and this one comes not from publishers but from libraries. The New York Times, in its October 22 edition, reports that a number of libraries and institutions, including the Boston Public Library, a consortium of research and academic libraries including the Universities of Massachusetts and Connecticut, and the Smithsonian have withheld their books from Google's scanners. Instead, they are making their collections available only to the Open Content Alliance, another organization involved in the digitizing of old books, but unlike Google and Microsoft, a nonprofit association.

Here is the issue. While Google and Microsoft scan the books in the institutional libraries at no charge to the cooperating institution, they place restrictions on how these digitized books may be viewed. Access to the texts is free, but the scanners require that the books be reached only through their respective search engines. So, if you want to view a book Google has scanned, you can only find it by using Google's search engine. You cannot access it through Microsoft or Yahoo's search engine. The same applies to books Microsoft has scanned and Microsoft's search engine.

Objections Raised To Google Book Search (And This Time It's Not From Publishers)

- By Michael Stillman

none

The objecting institutions do not like to see private businesses controlling access to the world of knowledge contained in these books. This is despite the unquestionable fact that Google and Microsoft are doing researchers and readers a great favor by making vast amounts of knowledge readily available at their fingertips. In the past, huge amounts of time and work were required to reach this material, visiting many libraries, perhaps thousands of miles away, searching through their records, and obtaining permission to look at their old books (which might be denied). Google and Microsoft have made a difficult and laborious process very simple. They have provided us with instant access to the text of millions of old books and they don't even charge for it.

So what is the issue? This process puts what was previously under the control of nonprofit, mostly public institutions, under the dominion of private, for profit ones. Their ultimate responsibility is to their shareholders, not the public. There is something unsettling about the thought that knowledge, once available equally to all through the public library system, could effectively be controlled by institutions created to make money for their shareholders. It is already a huge issue that most of our access to news is controlled by for-profit organizations whose financial interests may determine what we see, or how it is "spun." Could this also happen to all of our past knowledge as well?

The objecting institutions are instead making their books available for scanning to the Open Content Alliance. The OCA is a nonprofit and places no restrictions on how its material may be accessed. It is placed on an open server where any search engine, Google and Microsoft included, may access it freely. It favors no one. However, there is a downside to this. The institutions must pay to have their books scanned. This is an expensive process with no Google or Microsoft to foot the bill. The institutions must find public-spirited contributors to finance the scanning, rather than accessing the enormous profits of Google and Microsoft. The result is this is a slower process for the OCA, resulting in a less complete database than those offered by their commercial counterparts.