[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
ALPSP-Sally Morris Statement Re. Google Digitizing
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: ALPSP-Sally Morris Statement Re. Google Digitizing
- From: Ann Okerson <ann.okerson@yale.edu>
- Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 20:19:23 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Of possible interest. This statement can be found on the ALPSP Web site, at: www.alpsp.org ___________________ Google Print for Libraries � ALPSP position statement ALPSP is the international trade association for notforprofit publishers (learned societies, university presses and others). ALPSP also represents others, including commercial publishers, who work with nonprofits in the scholarly and professional information chain. ALPSP currently has 340 members in more than 30 countries of the world, between them publishing between onethird and onehalf of the world�s peer reviewed journals; the majority also publish books. ALPSP has maintained close contact with Google during the development of Google fulltext indexing and Google Print for Publishers. Indeed, the Association has encouraged members to enable fulltext indexing of their online publications, and published in April 2004 an �Advice Note� on �Enabling Google to Index your Fulltext Content�, written for us by Kiran Bapna and Anurag Acharya of Google. We also encouraged participation in �Google Print for Publishers�, mentioning it frequently in our members� newsletter ALPSP Alert, and have reported the experience of those members who do participate in either initiative. Both of the above initiatives, however, are carried out in the context of explicit agreements with participating publishers; thus, the copying and resultant indexing of content which they entail is done with publishers� permission and therefore does not infringe copyright. Publishers are free to choose whether or not to participate, and to define the parameters of their participation. �Google Print for Libraries�, on the other hand, was apparently developed without any consultation with publishers. It entails making complete digital copies of publications, including � in the case of some of the participating libraries � works which are still in copyright. Irrespective of whether the results may be damaging or beneficial to the copyright owners, the fact remains that copying on such a scale is in clear contravention of copyright law and is not covered by any exception in any relevant legislation. Permitting publishers to �opt out� is not an acceptable substitute for proper licensing in the first place; while we appreciate that publisherbypublisher negotiations could be impractical, by working through representative trade organisations, or even collective licensing agencies, it should be possible to negotiate a workable licensing framework. In our discussions with Google, a practical way forward has been found to protect the sometimes very considerable investment of publishers who have already digitised some of their publications (including outofcopyright works, such as back runs of journals); such works may be included by the publisher in the �Google Print for Publishers� program, thus enabling them to specify a source from which the content may be purchased, and to control the extent to which the content may be displayed to the user. ALPSP has publicised this solution to its members. However, Google�s representatives do not yet seem willing to arrive at a practical way forward in relation to incopyright works which the publisher has not yet digitised. Google has variously stated that it wishes to collaborate fully with publishers; that it believes that the copying involved is covered by Fair Use/Fair Dealing (which we absolutely dispute); that the precedent of Kelly v ArribaSoft is applicable (which we also dispute); and that the copying is justified by the beneficial nature of the resultant use (which is no defence, in our view, against a copyright infringement). The Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers calls on Google to cease unlicensed digitisation of copyright materials with immediate effect, and to enter into urgent discussions with representatives of the publishing industry in order to arrive at an appropriate licensing solution for �Google Print for Libraries�. We cannot believe that a business which prides itself on its cooperation with publishers could seriously wish to build part of its business on a basis of copyright infringement. Sally Morris Chief Executive, ALPSP July 2005
- Prev by Date: Creative Commons
- Next by Date: Re: Creative Commons
- Previous by thread: Creative Commons
- Next by thread: Princeton to offer digital textbooks
- Index(es):