contentgoogle

USjudgeweighsGooglebookcopyrightcase23September2013,byJohnBiersAwomanchoosestheGooglewebsearchenginefrontpageonhertabletintheFrenchwesterncityofRennes,May13,2013.
AfederaljudgeMondaypointedlyquestionedattorneysfortheAuthorsGuildinalong-runningcaseonwhetherGoogle'sbook-scanningprojectviolatescopyrightlaw.
Thetwosidespresentedoralargumentsinahearingonwhetherthecaseshouldbedismissed,orwhethertheauthorscanmaintaintheirchallengetothemassivedigitizationproject.
USDistrictJudgeDennyChinsaidacorequestionindeterminingthecaseiswhetherthereis"benefittosociety"inhelpingusersfindinformationfrombooks,facilitatinginter-libraryloansorpermittingdatamining.
AllofthesefunctionshavebeencitedbyproponentsofGoogle's"LibraryProject"inlegalbriefs,Chinsaid.
Anattorneyfortheguildsaidthatwhilesomeusesmaybenefitsocietyinsomeinstances,itshouldnotoverrideauthors'rightstocontrolthecontenttheycreated.
"Thenthere'saquestionofwhetherGooglehastopayforit,"EdwardRosenthal,anattorneyrepresentingtheAuthorsGuild,toldthecourt.
Theback-and-forthbetweenRosenthalandChindominateda45-minutehearingontheeight-yearoldproceeding.
Googlehasaskedthecourtforsummaryjudgement,arulingthatwouldguttheheartoftheguild'scase.
Theauthors'group,inturn,hasaskedthecourttodenyGoogle'sdefensethatthecopyingisa"fairuse"thatallowsadeviationfromnormalcopyrightprotections.
Googlehasscannedmorethan20millionbookssofarintheproject.
Booksinthepublicdomain—withoutcurrentcopyrights—aremadeavailableonlinetothepublicforfree.
ForcopyrightedbooksGoogleoffersasearchabledatabasethatdisplayssnippetsoftext.
TheguildhasarguedthatcontentcreatorsshouldcontroltheirworkandthatGoogle'sdisplayoftheexcerptsviolatescopyrightnorms.
TheguildarguesfurtherthatGoogle'sobjectivesarepurelycommercialsinceGoogle'smaingoalintheendeavoristoboostuseofitssearchengine,whichgeneratesadvertisingrevenue.
WhilesomeusersofGoogle'sprojectmayhaveworthyaims,Google'suseofthematerialarenotfairuse,theguildargues.
Googlecountersthatitsbook-scanningprogramprovidesavaluablesocietalbenefitthatcanprovidemuchsought-afterinformationtousers,permitinnovativewaystoanalyzetextsandgenerallyenhanceknowledge.
Googlearguesitsuseofthematerialisonly"indirectlycommercial.
"Chinfocusedmostofhisquestionsontheguild'scontentionsaboutGoogle'sobjectives.
ChinsaidGoogle'suseofthematerialcanbefairuse,evenif1/2therearecommercialbenefitstothecompany.
AnotherquestionChinfixatedonwastheguild'sargumentthattheGoogleserviceharmsauthorsbydivertingbusinessawayfromAmazonandotherbooksellersonceconsumersrealizetheycanfindexcerptsontheGooglesiteforfree.
ChinconcededthatitispossiblethatareadermightdecidetoabandonapossiblepurchasebecauseoftheGooglesite,butquestionedwhethersuchanoutcomewasa"reasonable"possibility.
RosenthaltoldthecourtreaderswillstopbuyingbooksonAmazonbecauseoftheGooglesite.
ExcerptsavailableonAmazon'ssitedifferfromtheGooglesnippetsbecauseauthorsgettodecide,hesaid.
"Authorshavearighttodecidewhethertheywanttheirbooksnotonlydisplayed,butalsostored,"Rosenthalsaid.
Googlemeanwhilecontendsthatthereisnoevidencetheserviceharmsbooksales.
DaralynDurie,anattorneyrepresentingthetechgiant,saidtherewasonlythetiniestofchancesofausercouldcobbletogetherenoughcontentfromthesnippetstoavoidbuyingabook.
"There'snoreasontothinkGoogleBooksisbeingusedforapurposeotherthanwhatitwasdesignedfor,"Duriesaid.
Thetwosidesreachedatentative$125millionsettlementinthecasein2008,butChinrejectedtheagreementinaMarch2011ruling,concludingitwasnot"fair,adequateandreasonable.
"Thatopenedupthelitigationtoanewphase,culminatinginMonday'sone-dayhearing.
2013AFPAPAcitation:USjudgeweighsGooglebookcopyrightcase(2013,September23)retrieved7December2020fromhttps://phys.
org/news/2013-09-google-copyright-case.
htmlThisdocumentissubjecttocopyright.
Apartfromanyfairdealingforthepurposeofprivatestudyorresearch,nopartmaybereproducedwithoutthewrittenpermission.
Thecontentisprovidedforinformationpurposesonly.
PoweredbyTCPDF(www.
tcpdf.
org)2/2