[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
"Giveaways" and "corners" (RE: Libraries criticized for role in Google Book Search)
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: "Giveaways" and "corners" (RE: Libraries criticized for role in Google Book Search)
- From: "Rick Anderson" <rick.anderson@utah.edu>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:43:08 EST
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Allow me to focus on two very narrow slices of his argument: > Now they are just giving away access to one company that is > cornering the market on on-line access. This line of argument always kind of fascinates me. On the one hand, we all normally love the idea of information as a public good that doesn't diminish in value no matter how widely it's distributed. On the other hand, when a library "gives away" digitized copies of its books to Google, all of a sudden we want to talk about information as if it were a zero-sum commodity. I think a good question to ask about participant libraries is this: what did they have before they participated in the GBS project that they do not have now? (In other words, what did they actually "give away", as opposed to "give access to"?) The answer, of course, is nothing. They still have everything they had beforehand, and much more -- assuming one agrees that library-owned digital copies of all the scanned books from the library's collection constitute "much more." Even if the general public didn't benefit at all from this "giveaway," the libraries and their patrons benefited tremendously. What really seems to bother people is that Google has benefited as well without having paid any cash to the libraries from which it "took away" digital copies -- despite the fact that Google invested most or all of the time, money, and capital equipment that went into the project. I also think this use of the phrase "cornering the market" is sloppy. Google isn't cornering any market -- any company that has a lot of money is free to undertake a project exactly like this one and offer a different search interface. Are we really saying that Google shouldn't be permitted to have so much money? If so, that's fine, but let's not hide that argument behind a false and invalid one. --- Rick Anderson Assoc. Dir. for Scholarly Resources & Collections Marriott Library University of Utah rick.anderson@utah.edu
- Prev by Date: RE: Libraries criticized for role in Google Book Search
- Next by Date: RE: Libraries criticized for role in Google Book Search
- Previous by thread: Anyone Have Data ~ Eroding of Brands - International Editions
- Next by thread: Information resource about the Google Book settlement
- Index(es):