[Fwd: Google, libraries, and privacy]

[Joseph Murphy]

On Dec 20, 2004, at 6:47 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:

> But the privacy issue is one that we should consider before we turn 
> searching for library materials over to a non-library entity.

An interesting point, and one which I wholeheartedly agree with in 
cases like OpenWorldCat. However, I'd argue that we're not talking 
about library resources once we let Google digitize and store them. At 
that point, it's the user's resource, not ours, and we have a long 
tradition of trying to stay blind to the user's intent.

The implicit suggestion that libraries should either not provide 
materials to Google for digitization, or do so only if Google will 
formally restrict its business practices, seems to cut to the core of 
our belief in intellectual freedom. Somewhere down the road, do we 
start refusing ILL services to corporate libraries we disagree with, or 
government libraries if we disagree with agency policy, or Division 1 
schools if we think they fired a head coach unfairly?

(I know that Karen has not made this suggestion, but I think there are 
elements in the privacy absolutist camp which would lead us down this 
road.)

Granted, there are co-branding issues for the schools providing the 
material. While it's worth it for the schools to consider privacy 
issues, I personally wouldn't consider these potential concerns a 
dealbreaker, precisely because they are so easily foiled. Speaking of 
which, can anyone speak to the cobranding issues? Will we see texts 
marked as "Provided courtesy of the Standford Libraries"? Will they get 
to display a logo? Without knowing what delivery to the end user will 
look like, I'm not prepared to call this a "library service" any more 
than I'd call the Communist Manifesto a publication of the British 
Library for giving Karl Marx some desk space.

 From the user services point of view, I'll continue to say that it is 
our job to do more education. I have to admit that I've never 
considered the privacy policy when deciding whether I should link to a 
resource. (But then, I've only worked at private institutions.) 
Ultimately, though, there's just too much good material on the Internet 
for me to believe in a more restrictive policy than caveat emptor.

> Some of the articles I saw and some of the quotes had an element of: 
> "well, libraries can't afford to do this, so it's great that Google 
> will do it for us." Google isn't doing it FOR Libraries, Google is 
> doing it for Google. Which is fine as long as we realize that, and 
> realize that it is
> not a substitute for library service.

This is an excellent point. I think I interpret the quotes differently 
than Karen does ("Google has the money to do this faster and better 
than we can, and there's no good reason not to cooperate"), but 
ultimately, Google Print looks no more like library service than your 
local bookstore does.

Joseph M. Murphy
Librarian and Technology Consultant
Library and Information Services
Kenyon College
murphyjm at kenyon.edu
740/427-5120