[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Google Settlement: Harvard not participating
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: Google Settlement: Harvard not participating
- From: "B.G. Sloan" <bgsloan2@yahoo.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 17:16:58 EST
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
I don't understand the big deal about Harvard's position. It's getting a lot of press, but as I understand it, they are simply saying that they are going to continue to do what they have been doing all along: "University officials said that Harvard=A0would continue its policy of only allowing Google to scan books whose copyrights have expired." I'm probably missing something here, but since when did maintaining the status quo become newsworthy? Bernie Sloan Sora Associates Bloomington, IN --- On Tue, 11/4/08, Lesley Harris <lesleyeharris@comcast.net> wrote: From: Lesley Harris <lesleyeharris@comcast.net> Subject: Google Settlement: Harvard not participating To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Date: Tuesday, November 4, 2008, 5:51 PM Harvard will not be part of the Google Settlement reached last week: from the Harvard Crimson - "Harvard University Library will not take part in Google's book scanning project for in-copyright works after finding the terms of its landmark $125 million settlement regarding copyrighted materials unsatisfactory, University officials said yesterday. "Harvard had been one of five academic libraries, along with Stanford, Oxford, Michigan, and the New York Public Library, partner with Google when the book scanning initiative was announced in October 2004. University officials said that Harvard would continue its policy of only allowing Google to scan books whose copyrights have expired. ... "In a letter released to library staff, University Library Director Robert C. Darnton, said that uncertainties in the settlement made it impossible for HUL to participate. "As we understand it, the settlement contains too many potential limitations on access to and use of the books by members of the higher education community and by patrons of public libraries," Darnton wrote. "The settlement provides no assurance that the prices charged for access will be reasonable," Darnton added, "especially since the subscription services will have no real competitors [and] the scope of access to the digitized books is in various ways both limited and uncertain." He also said that the quality of the books may be a cause for concern, as "in many cases will be missing photographs, illustrations and other pictorial works, which will reduce their utility for research and education." Lesley Ellen Harris lesley @ copyrightlaws.com www.copyrightanswers.blogspot.com
- Prev by Date: Re: How many (peer reveiwed) journals are there?
- Next by Date: Tr: How many (peer reveiwed) journals are there?
- Previous by thread: Google Settlement: Harvard not participating
- Next by thread: Effects of Green Open Access on Journals, Repositories and Academi=
- Index(es):