RE: Google's Card Catalog Should Be Left Open

["Miller, Ron" <rmiller@hwwilson.com>]

There seems to be some confusion about the difference between a
bibliographic entry in a catalog and a copy of, or excerpt from, a book.

Ron Miller

 -----Original Message-----
Sent:	Friday, September 23, 2005 11:54 AM
To:	liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject:	RE: Google's Card Catalog Should Be Left Open 

Maybe it's just me, but I think EFF really missed the boat on a number of
levels by refering to the Google Print for Libraries project as "Google's
Card Catalog".
 
Bernie Sloan

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: EFF Press <press@eff.org>
Date: September 21, 2005 4:03:29 PM EDT
To: presslist@eff.org
Subject: [E-B] EFF: Google's Card Catalog Should Be Left Open

Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release

For Immediate Release: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Contact:

Fred von Lohmann
    Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
    Electronic Frontier Foundation
    fred@eff.org
    +1 415 436-9333 x123 (office), +1 415 215-6087 (cell)

Google's Card Catalog Should Be Left Open

San Francisco, CA - Yesterday, the Authors Guild filed a class-action
copyright infringement suit against Google over its Google Print library
project.  Working with major university libraries, Google Print aims to
make thousands of books searchable via the Web, allowing people to search
for key words or phrases in books. The public may browse the full text of
public domain materials in the process of such a search, but only a few
sentences of text around the search term in books still covered by
copyright.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) applauds Google's effort to
create the digital equivalent of a library card catalog, and believes the
company has a strong case.

"Just as libraries don't need to pay publishers when they create a card
catalog, neither should Google or other search engines be required to when
they create an improved digital equivalent," said EFF Senior Staff
Attorney Fred von Lohmann.

In defending the lawsuit, Google is relying on the copyright principle of
fair use, which allows the public to copy works without having to ask
permission or pay licensing fees to copyright holders. EFF believes Google
is likely to prevail on its defense. One key point in Google's favor is
that Google Print is a transformative use of these books -- the company is
creating a virtual card catalog to assist people in finding relevant
books, rather than creating replacements for the books themselves.

In addition, it is almost certain that Google Print will boost, rather
than hurt, the market for the copyrighted books. "It's easy to see how
Google Print can stimulate demand for books that otherwise would lay
undiscovered in library stacks," said von Lohmann. "It's hard to see how
it could hurt publishers or authors."

For additional legal analysis, EFF recommends the white paper, "The Google
Print Library Project: A Copyright Analysis," recently published by noted
DC copyright attorney Jonathan Band of Policy Bandwidth.

The Google Print Library Project: A Copyright Analysis:
http://www.policybandwidth.com/doc/googleprint.pdf

For this release:
http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2005_09.php#003994

-end-