Comments on: Google Books and the librarian backlash

By: S. Eric Rhoads

S. Eric Rhoads — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:06:12 +0000

I wish academic journals, who lock publicly funded research behind subscription fees offered only to select outlets, faced a fraction of the scrutiny Google is receiving for their Books project.

By: Cyrus Moore

Cyrus Moore — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:34:54 +0000

I agree with Theresa Geary. I too am an author and to me Google is simply using loopholes in the law to unethically acquire copyright and divert money that should be going to authors into their own coffers. If there are any of you out there who think Google is on the side of consumers, consider this. If authors are not paid properly for their work, how many great literary works are likely to be written in the future?

By: Rolf Pielemeier

Rolf Pielemeier — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:59:49 +0000

I cannot claim to have read every word among the comments but I think the key point from a Librarians point of view is not the copyright issue. Please note the meaning of “They do not SORT” refers to defining the value of sources. Invisible to most consumers Schools and Librarys (and for some issues Churches) have through out time, and for better or worse defined what is truth. In case you missed it that authority is being replaced by your social graph which may include high school friends who’s POV has not changed much since graduation. There are still ways to “sort” for yourself but the burden is on you. If you do not recognize your role the democratization of truth you will surely live the consequences.

By: Jeff John Roberts

Jeff John Roberts — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:11:11 +0000

Ed, thank you for calling attention to this. You are right — the book should have read Sheryl Sandberg, not Marissa Myers. This was simply a mental lapse on my part where I write the name of one ex-Googler when I meant the other. Unfortunately, the error was not caught until after the book was published.

By: Stijn

Stijn — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:08:12 +0000

We think sharing knowledge to all people is a great tool for sustainable education!

Stijn Tebbes
Founder Blabook
Let’ s talk about Books!

By: businessvoodoo

businessvoodoo — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:36:58 +0000

Reblogged this on NikiVallwaysMyway and commented: lol, gotta love google this morning! first in the stream, their investment in wind farming. now, this reminder of the book thing. i don't know, i just some how see a lot of papers floating in the air being blown around until they all land somewhere in some new reality on freebase.com.

By: businessvoodoo

businessvoodoo — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:34:37 +0000

that would be owning/controlling

By: businessvoodoo

businessvoodoo — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:33:43 +0000

and with google now owing freebase . . .

By: Jak Boumans

Jak Boumans — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:48:32 +0000

There is a lot of ink addiction and emotions in these comments.

By: vincentfarrellartist

vincentfarrellartist — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:23:37 +0000

I completely agreed with Nicole Solis and THeresa Geary on this one. These are just brinksmanship tactics and used all the time in the corporate game of who blinks first. What should actually happen is to have the digital library as another form of archiving, especially since we have no known proof is exactly how long a digital library will remain intact. Until we have had a digital library in existence at least 100 hundred years , we will never know if it actually serves its purpose.

Google Scans/ Books has some pretty big balls to play that kind of game or they are completely ignorant to believe they have the wiggle room to is protected by “fair use” doctrine…c’mon! that is completely challengeable and a big fruit bearing argument for any plaintiff in a civil action and may be punishable as theft in a criminal action.

I just prefer to go to the library, talk to the librarian who happened to major in library science, check out a book, read the book that does not require batteries and that does not emit EMF-electro magnetic fields. much simpler and cheaper.