Google

Google likes to say it's a different kind of company, said The Wall Street Journal in an editorial. But even the king of all search tools still has to play by the rules. Google is now scanning millions of books from five major libraries, including those of Harvard, Oxford, and New York City's Main Branch. The goal of Google Print is to create a searchable online database available to anyone on the planet with an Internet connection. If you're searching for, say, 'œEgyptian hieroglyphics,' Google Print would only show 'œsnippets' of copyrighted books—a few sentences or, at most, a paragraph. Google contends this is permitted under the 'œfair use' provision of copyright law—the same provision that lets reviewers, for example, quote from other people's books. But authors and publishers are outraged, because Google isn't paying them, or publishers, for access to their work. Last week, the Association of American Publishers and the 8,000-member Authors Guild sued Google to stop the scanning.

Of course we sued, said Nick Taylor, an author and president of the Authors Guild, in The Washington Post. It takes years of work to research and write a book. Where does Google get off deciding that authors' blood and sweat 'œisn't worth paying for'? Sorry, but you're looking at this all wrong, said Columbia University law professor Tim Wu in Slate.com. The reality is that 99 percent of all books in massive public and university libraries are rarely, if ever, read. Google will direct millions of searchers to these valuable works, give them a tiny percentage of their contents, and even direct them to sites where they can buy the whole book, if it's still in circulation. Rather than hurt authors or publishers, this new service will be a boon, opening obscure works to vast new audiences. This is a 'œwin-win' for everyone. 'œYears from now, we will be shocked to remember that Google's online searches were once considered controversial.'

If this all sounds familiar, said Cameron Stracher in The Wall Street Journal, it should. Remember Napster? The music industry claimed that the online service was ripping off its songs without payment, and went to court to stop it. But lawsuits can't stop the immense forward momentum of the Internet; eventually, the industry gave in to the inevitable, and agreed to let online services such as iTunes distribute their music for a small fee. 'œDoubtless this wondrous thing called Google will arrive at a similar arrangement,' said R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. in The Washington Times. But until then, 'œonly the lawyers can be happy.'

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up