[Web4lib] Copyright Law (fair use) analysis of Google Print program

[Karen Coyle]

Steven C. Perkins wrote:

> Karen:
>
> I can see Google making an index of all the words and assembling the 
> sentence with the search term and the two sentences on either side at 
> the time it replies to the search request.  In that case there is no 
> "copy" of the complete work ever present for the copyrighted works, 
> except at the moment of digitization and loading into the database as 
> parsed and that can easily be flushed out of the memory buffer.

Google is creating scanned images of pages, not just indexes of 
keywords. That's the real crux of the matter here. Those scanned images 
are being given to the libraries that own the original paper works.

>
> Personally, I am an "Information wants to be Free" person and I think 
> the publishers are no longer needed. 

Hmmm. Do you read many vanity press books? If you think that all 
publishers do is reproduce finished copy, you are in for a rude awakening.

>
> If you go back to the SONY vcr decision, the making of one copy for 
> safekeeping or personal use can be supported.  If I were Google, I'd 
> argue that the copy given to the providing library and the copy 
> distributed across the Google servers is a "safekeeping" copy.  Again, 
> at no time can a searcher get a full copy of a work.

"Personal" use is exactly as it says: personal. An institution is not 
covered under the Home Recording act (see http://www.hrrc.org). In terms 
of the copyright law, there is no consideration of whether a searcher 
can get a "full copy" of the work -- the copyright law covers the making 
of copies, not their access. And note that "safekeeping" copies for 
libraries are sufficiently addressed by current copyright law in section 
108, and there are strong restrictions on that copying.

I am no fan of copyright law, but if the discussion is whether Google's 
activities violate the law, then I think that there's a good case to be 
made that the letter of the law is being violated. The question then 
arises as to whether the law, as it stands today, is relevant  for 
digital materials and for uses such as those envisioned by Google. But 
to claim that somehow Google's actions fall within the law is a real 
stretch. I welcome Google's actions, however, because I think that by 
pushing the envelope they may force a re-assessment of what copying 
means in the digital environment. Ultimately, their actions may lead to 
a general agreement that copyright law based on the hard copy 
environment is not suitable for the digital, networked information world.

kc

>
> Regards,
>
> Steven C. Perkins
>
>
> At 05:53 PM 9/8/2005, you wrote:
>
>> I see some immediate problems with Band's thesis. Kelly v. Arriba 
>> Soft had to do with the copying of web resources already available 
>> for open access; Google is taking print resources and digitizing 
>> them. Also, although the copying of the books for the purposes of 
>> indexing may not be a violation of copyright law, Google is making 
>> full digital copies of the books for the libraries. Those copies are 
>> probably not covered under fair use, and for sure they aren't covered 
>> under section 108 of the copyright law (which allows libraries to 
>> make copies under some circumstances for the purposes of preservation).
>>
>> kc
>>
>> Steven C. Perkins wrote:
>>
>>> Hello:
>>>
>>> The link below goes to a 6 page analysis of the Google Print program 
>>> by Jonathan Band.
>>>
>>> http://www.policybandwidth.com/doc/googleprint.pdf
>>>
>>> He concludes that under the fair use results of the Arriba case [1], 
>>> it is unlikely that the Google Print program violates US copyright law.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Steven C. Perkins
>>>
>>> [1] Kelly v. Arriba Soft, 336 F.3d 811 (9th Cir. 2003) 
>>> http://www.eff.org/IP/Linking/Kelly_v_Arriba_Soft/20020206_9th_cir_decision.pdf 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Steven C. Perkins, JD, MLL                      Coordinator of 
>>> Reference Services
>>> M.D. Anderson Library                           University of Houston
>>> SPerkins at UH.Edu                         713-743-9775; fax 9778
>>>                        "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"  --Juvenal
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------***----------------------------------------- 
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Web4lib mailing list
>>> Web4lib at webjunction.org
>>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> -----------------------------------
>> Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
>> kcoyle at kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
>> ph.: 510-540-7596
>> fx.: 510-848-3913
>> mo.: 510-435-8234
>> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>

-- 
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
kcoyle at kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------