[Web4lib] RE: More on the Open Content Alliance

[Roy Tennant]

OK, Rich, I take back all those things I said about you in the  
debate, since you've come to my defense. ;-)

But really, I'm a huge admirer of the University of Michigan Digital  
Library Production Service. If they say the product of Google  
Library's digitization efforts is good enough for them, then I know  
it's good enough for me. I can remember a while back when John Price  
Wilkin said he was satisfied with their procedures, and that  
immediately put my concerns to rest about the output of the process.

But of course that's just one part of the puzzle. Sure, they can keep  
their techniques proprietary -- it is entirely within their rights.  
But that doesn't mean we have to like it, or not contrast it with  
other projects that may be more open about their technologies and  
procedures. It seems to me that if Google truly believed in their  
much-vaunted mission "to organize the world's information and make it  
universally accessible and useful" then they would take this  
opportunity to enlighten us all on how we can all digitize better and  
faster than ever before. But I guess not. Their true mission, it  
seems (as if anyone doubted this) is to corner the market on  
information and therefore make a killing on advertising since we will  
all need to go through their system to see the goods.

Lest the tone of my message be misjudged, I want to again say that I  
have nothing but the utmost respect for my colleagues at the  
University of Michigan. I'm picking a bone with Google, not the Univ.  
of Michigan Library. The Library has only done what we have all  
wanted to do -- find some way to digitize large amounts of material  
for little cost.

Word on the street is that the Univ. of Michigan Library has the best  
contract with Google, no doubt after some assiduous negotiations, but  
that other libraries may not have been so exacting in their  
specifications. But we don't know that, do we? The shroud of secrecy  
that surrounds this project only leaves those of us on the outside to  
conjecture, with all the possibility of unfounded fears that such  
ignorance fosters. Google made their bed, let them lie in it.
Roy



On Oct 27, 2005, at 4:23 PM, Richard Wiggins wrote:

> Roy and I debated the merits of the Google Print project at Internet
> Librarian yesterday.  I took the "pro" side -- that the project is
> worthwhile and something to celebrate.  Roy raised some very valid
> cautionary issues.  (The product manager for Google Print, Adam Smith,
> joined us for Q&A time.)
>
> Thus Roy is far better equipped to represent why he finds Google's
> secrecy as to technology a concern, but let me take a stab at it:
>
> Google is trying to have it both ways: the Google Print project will
> make it possible to search the full text of book collections held by
> some of the leading research libraries on the planet. It sounds almost
> pro bono.  Publishers are terrified of IP implications, but now we
> learn that the technology for doing the digitization is also secret
> and presumably IP that will be proprietary to Google.  A cynic might
> conclude that the University of Michigan et all are really serving the
> role of subsidiaries of Google -- granting the company access not only
> to intellectual property that libraries do not own, but also letting
> Google hide any details of the tools and techniques the project
> entails. .
>
> Try a thought experiment: if, say, the NSF gave a major research
> library a $200M grant to do its own book digitization project,
> wouldn't you expect that tools and techniques developed as part of the
> project would be shared in scholarly papers and conferences, to the
> benefit of any other library that wants to do likewise?
>
> /rich
>
> On 10/27/05, Perry Willett <pwillett at umich.edu> wrote:
>
>> Others have commented on the OCA website itself, but I'd like to  
>> respond to
>> an issue in Roy's message:
>>
>>
>>>         Meanwhile, Google representatives still refuse to
>>> answer any questions as to their procedures for scanning books in
>>> the Google Library project, despite direct questions at Internet
>>> Librarian today.
>>> Roy
>>>
>>
>> Obviously, I'm not an objective observer here, but I don't see what
>> difference it makes how Google scans the materials. The salient  
>> points are
>> a) we're convinced that it poses no risks to our collection and b)  
>> the
>> resulting digital objects meet the standards of the digital library
>> community. For more on b), see our FAQ (especially Q16):
>> <http://www.lib.umich.edu/staff/google/public/faq.pdf>
>>
>> (Bravo OCA!)
>>
>> Perry Willett
>> Head, Digital Library Production Service
>> 300 Hatcher North
>> University of Michigan
>> Ann Arbor MI 48109-1205
>> Ph: 734-764-8074
>> Fax: 734-647-6897
>> Email: pwillett at umich.edu
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Web4lib mailing list
>> Web4lib at webjunction.org
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>
>