Take the PW Survey - Listen to the Google Book Settlement & Webinar

Yes, it's the Google Book Settlement again.

With a September 4th deadline looming to opt out of or object to the Google Book Search Settlement, Publishers Weekly is conducting a survey designed to gather a broad view of how the Settlement is being viewed.

Could you to take a few minutes to answer this brief, targeted questionnaire? PW wants to gauge industry opinion. Note that you don't have to have standing in the suit to participate in the survey. It should take just a few minutes.

Of course, some of us who feel strongly about the compelling need for this settlement to go through in order to ensure authors and publishers are offered some protection and ensure copyright is respected may take longer filling it out!

As I said in a previous post, while the settlement is not perfect, it's an important first step. It literally took years, and involved a group of very smart, committed representatives for authors, publishers and a global search engine. I don't see anyone raising their hand to do better.

Without the settlement, we remain in a lawless frontier, and the implications would be devastating for copyright in the digital arena. There are a lot of people who can benefit from a state of anarchy, but it's time for content creators and those that value content to draw a line in the sand.

Please click here when you are ready to take the survey. (if necessary, the address to cut and paste is: www.zoomerang.com/Survey/?p=WEB229EB66ZEQ5)

Results of the survey will be shared in the August 24th issue of PW. If you have questions or comments about the survey, please contact Laura Girmscheid, PW Research Manager at lgirmscheid@reedbusiness.com.

If you'd like to learn more about the settlement, you can check out the information on the Author's Guild and the Association of American Publisher's websites. But there's also a recent Webinar hosted by Publisher's Weekly you can access. Go to www.PublishersWeekly.com, click on "Tools" to the far right of the top navibar, then Webcasts and register for the webcast:
Google Library Project Settlement: What It Means for Publishers (or just click on the link!).

You will be able to access the webcast archive for one year following the initial webcast.

Description of the Webinar:

In a webinar first, the leaders involved with the crafting of the Google Library Project Settlement will share with the publishing industry the benefits of the agreement for publishers and authors. If approved by the Court in October, the agreement will create one of the most far-reaching intellectual, cultural, and commercial platforms for access to digital books for the reading public, while granting publishers unprecedented opportunities and protections. Presented in collaboration with Google, The Association of American Publishers, and Publishers Weekly, the web session is a must-attend event.

PANELISTS
Richard Sarnoff, Co-Chair, Bertelsmann, Inc., AAP Board of Directors
John Sargent, Chief Executive Officer, Macmillan, AAP Board of Directors
Jan Constantine, General Counsel, Author's Guild
James Gleick, Author
Michael Healy, Executive Director Designate, Book Rights Registry

MODERATOR
Jim Milliot, News Director, Publishers Weekly

Thanks for listening! I think it's important.

My Body of Content, My Choice

Many of you have heard of the suit the Association of American Publishers and the Author's Guild (a class action suit) brought against Google in response to Google's plans to digitize copyrighted content without the copyright holder's permission. Google additionally gives a complete digital copy to the libraries from whom they were getting the content, to do with what they wanted.

While Google said they were only planning on using "snippets" (not a legally defined quantity, so it's whatever they decide) to aid in search, and felt that the open wording of Fair Use would cover them in making entire copies of protected material, Publishers and the Author's Guild did not agree. Both Publishers and the Author's Guild felt that anyone making a full copy of a copyrighted work should ask the copyright holder's permission.

After two years of negotiation, a Settlement was reached, which you also may also have heard about. The Settlement has been delayed and there will be fairness hearings on October 7th. Now it seems that everyone and their kitchen sink is weighing in with issues, and the settlement may not go through. That would not be good news, in my opinion. While the settlement is by no means perfect, it's a start. Without it, content creators and publishers are left very vulnerable on the digital frontier.

And it is literally a frontier. To continue the metaphor, settlers are going out in their covered wagons, putting stakes in the ground, claiming the open land. It's not an easy life, and initially, fortune seems to favor lawlessness. But once enough people move out there, laws become increasingly important to be able to survive and thrive as a society. You've seen the movies–it's a challenging process, but respecting property and creating and abiding by a rule of law is a key next step. That's what needs to happen on the digital frontier, and the settlement is a great first step.

The settlement needs advocates–authors, publishers, content creators of all kinds–to counter the 'all digital content should be free and accessible to all' voices, also the 'I'm a competitor of Google and I don't want them to get anything' guys with deep pockets. I'm sure there are more--and likely more compellingly presented–arguments! They may have some valid points.

But if they succeed in blocking the settlement, they sure aren't replacing it with anything better. We're just back to the frontier, where having copyright will not protect your content from being fully digitized by anyone (Google, Microsoft, Jane Doe, whoever). It will be used as they see fit, banking on the ambiguity of Fair Use to protect them until something is so egregious, someone sues them. Is this sounding familiar?

For those that don't see the problem of making a full digital copy, here is my metaphor: If I want to show (or not show) parts of my body to the public–maybe I wear a short skirt, or maybe I wear a scarf, or maybe I go topless in a particular place–that's my choice. But to those that want to take a full body scan of all of me–yes, EVEN if you promise you'll only show little bits, even if it's for medical reasons–you have to ask me. My body of content, my choice.

John Sargent, an AAP member, was featured in an interview in the June 8th issue of Publishers Weekly (Sargent Makes the Case). Additionally, Tom Allen, the new CEO of the AAP had a recent op-ed in Publisher's Weekly.

In recent days some strong arguments in favor of the Settlement have also appeared in print from individuals who are not party to the Settlement. Reuter's financial columnist Mark Gimien has a recent piece "In Defense of Google Books" which describes the benefits and goes on to debunk some of the myths that have been circulating with great clarity and is well worth reading.

Another is a letter to the Financial Times "Booklovers should cheer Google’s plan" from David Balto, a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress and former Policy Director of the Federal Trade Commission. These should offer a better understanding of what’s at stake.

I also wanted to include some broad information about the Settlement and why it seems a very positive step. Take a moment to review the points. Romance may not be on the front lines of what is at issue, but the principal affects us all, and we need to stand together:

Millions of copyright-protected books are out of print and largely out of reach, available only through the largest research libraries in the country. The Google Book Settlement announced in October 2008–the result of 30 months of negotiations between and among authors, publishers, university libraries and Google–changes all that, working a revolution in the access to knowledge. If approved by the court, the settlement will:

• Provide readers and researchers with access to millions of out-of-print books, many of which are currently difficult or impossible for readers to obtain, in a searchable online database.

• Turn every public library building in the U.S. into a world-class research facility by providing free access to the online portal of out-of-print books.

• Permit any college or university in the U.S. to subscribe to the same rich database of out-of-print books.

• Give new commercial life to millions of books, while protecting the economic rights of authors and publishers.

If not approved by the court, the litigation between AAP, the Authors Guild and Google may continue for years, and with a great risk that authors and publishers will have no effective means to stop the widespread use of copyrighted material that is likely to follow.


I. Benefits for Readers and Researchers

The settlement unlocks a vast archive of out-of-print books, providing readers and researchers with far greater access to books than ever before.

Access at your public library. The settlement turns every library into a world-class research facility, by offering every public library building in the U.S.–all 16,500 of them–a free online portal to millions of out-of-print books.

Access at colleges and universities. The settlement offers students and teachers in even the smallest and most remote American colleges and universities access, through institutional subscriptions, to millions of books previously available only in the largest academic libraries in the country. Faculty members and students will be able to tap into this library from their offices and dorm rooms.

Access at your computer. Anyone online in the U.S. will have free “preview” access to hundreds of millions of pages of text (up to 20% of each book). Review hundreds of accounts of the Battle of Vicksburg, or of the beginnings of the Industrial Revolution, or of the sources and interpretation of Moby Dick, at no charge. Find one book particularly compelling? Buy access to the entire book. Access to public domain books is free, of course, and authors controlling the rights to their books can choose to give away access for free.

II. Benefits for Authors and Publishers

Out of print books have value, but that value is lost to the market and to authors and publishers. The settlement breathes new commercial life into out-of-print books, while leaving the existing market for in-print books alone.

Find new readers. Out-of-print books need no longer be relegated to the used book market. The settlement will make out-of-print works available to hundreds of millions of readers, through ad-supported previews, sales of online editions, and institutional subscriptions. If a book catches on, there will be sales data to prove it, which may create an opportunity to bring the work back into print in traditional form.

In-print books are unaffected. A cardinal rule in the negotiations was not to disturb the market for in-print books. Titles that are in print won’t be made available through any of the means described in the settlement, unless the author and publisher expressly want them to be.

A Book Rights Registry to protect rightsholders. A non-profit registry governed by authors and publishers will oversee the settlement on their behalf, to help make sure rightsholders receive the benefits they’re entitled to. (Sign up for the Registry by filing a claim at googlebooksettlement.com.)

A fair share of revenues. 63% of gross revenues go to authors and publishers; Google keeps 37%. Funds will be paid to the Book Rights Registry, which will pay authors and publishers after retaining a modest administrative fee. If rights have reverted to authors, they will receive 100% of the rightsholder revenue.

Unprecedented control for authors and publishers. Authors and publishers will manage their rights through an account management page at the Book Rights Registry. Authors who control rights to their works, for example, may choose to allow Google to display ad-supported previews of books, sell online editions (authors may set the price or let an algorithm do it for them), and license the work to colleges and universities, or they may choose to block all display uses. Authors can change their minds, at any time, with reasonable notice. What if a book comes back into traditional print? The rightsholder can then simply turn off all display uses, if it chooses, and permit the publisher to sell the work through standard retail outlets.

Authors’ estates, too. Authors’ estates exercise the same rights as authors.

At least $45 million in payments for unauthorized scanning. Any of Google’s digitizing of in-copyright books done before May 5, 2009 is considered unauthorized under the settlement. Google will pay to obtain a release of these copyright infringement claims. Under the settlement, Google will pay at least $60 and as much as $300 to rightsholders for each book that it scanned without authority, for a total payment to rightsholders of at least $45 million.

III. Benefits for All

Viable Market. The settlement creates a viable economic structure for a new digital market of on-line access to out-of-print and lesser known works.

Encourages competition. The settlement encourages competition by making non-exclusive all the rights granted to Google in the Agreement and by empowering the Book Rights Registry to negotiate arrangements with Google’s competitors.

Well, if you've gotten this far, congratulations and thank you! I want to continue to inform and clarify this issue for the community. We need educated advocates to support this important step.

AAP, Authors Guild, Google Announce GroundbreakingSettlement over Google Book Search Library Project

I wanted to share with you the recent press release and annoucement regarding a tentative settlement (pending court approval) regarding the lawsuits brought by the Associate of American Publishers and a class action suit by the
Author's Guild against Google.

This is a highly complex issue with strong opinions in every direction! Put perhaps overly simplisticly, these organizations actions were in response to Google's plans to digitize copyrighted material (entire books) without the right's holder's permission.

I wanted to share this information, and the material below was taken from and is available on the AAP website. It has been a very long and arduous process to get to this agreement. I applaud the participants and I think it is a remarkable and positive step that will significantly benefit all parties.

October 28, 2008

AAP, Authors Guild, Google Announce GroundbreakingSettlement over Google Book Search Library Project

On October 28, 2008, AAP announced a groundbreaking settlement agreement in the Google litigation that will expand access to out-of-print books online for millions of American readers, allow rightsholders, if they wish, to include in-print books, and will create a mechanism for payments to authors and publishers by establishing a Books Rights Registry.

AAP President and CEO Pat Schroeder stated "AAP is proud to have been a part of the process that has produced this historic, landmark agreement. We believe this settlement, the product of many years’ hard work, is a great 21st Century solution."

For More Information:

Press Release
Joint FAQ
Settlement Documents
Statement from AAP Chairman Richard Sarnoff
Settlement Website(Google)
Author's Guild Website

Past Coverage:

Click here to view the full complaint from 2005

Copyright: It's your body of content. Don't let people use it without permission.

I wanted to share a recent press release from the Association of American Publishers. Most publishers, including Harlequin, are members, and I am on the board.

The AAP wrestles with many issues that impact publishers, but the rights of the copyright holders to control their information—both in terms of freedom of speech/challenging censorship, as well as against misuse and piracy—are big issues.

Publishers Announce Agreements with Universities on New Copyright Guidelines for Course Content in Digital Formats

Three universities—Hofstra, Syracuse and Marquette—have reached agreement with the AAP on new copyright guidelines affirming that educational content delivered to students in digital formats should be treated under the same copyright principles that apply to printed materials.

Announced on January 17, the guidelines, which were developed separately by the three universities, govern how librarians and faculty members distribute copyrighted content through library electronic course reserves systems, course management systems, faculty and departmental web pages and other digital formats.

AAP worked with each of the three universities in cooperative efforts to establish easily understood and commonsense standards that help faculty and staff understand and interpret their rights and responsibilities when using copyrighted content in educational settings. Each of the guidelines reflects the specific needs of the particular university and is consistent with the principles of fair use while providing helpful guidance as to when permission from the copyright holder is required to copy or post materials in digital formats. AAP believes the guidelines, which are similar to those adopted by Cornell University last year, will serve as models for others colleges and universities.

In the last two years AAP has initiated discussions with a number of universities after observing that unlicensed digital copies of course materials were gradually replacing the licensed physical copying of articles, book chapters and other copyrighted works. While it is well established that physical copying of materials for distribution to multiple students, often in compilations known as coursepacks, generally requires permission from the copyright holder, faculty and staff seem less aware that permission is similarly required for distribution of electronic copies of such copyrighted materials. The new guidelines at each university clarify that the use of copyrighted works in digital formats requires such permission.

To view the copyright guidelines, go to:

Hofstra
Syracuse
Marquette

Now you'd think asking universities—asking anyone—to treat making and disseminating digital copies of copyrighted material in the same way paper photocopies of the same amount of material would be treated would be a no-brainer, wouldn't you? i.e. you'd need the same permissions—a process with an established protocol at Universities (established, I have to add, after a lawsuit some years ago, but in place for over a decade).

Unfortunately not.

I applaud Cornell, Hofstra, Syracuse and Marquette for taking a stand. It is the right thing to do, but they won't get universal accolades.

So why should we care that some professors are cheerfully doing their fellow professors out of any income from their scholarly work, now being read gratis on line? In fact some of us may be thankful, for the generous 'cost savings' those schools are passing on to parents and students from this practice.

Well, if you are generating income from being a storyteller, it is of collective concern that not only is a new generation being raised to think anything digital should be free and that copyright theft is acceptable by their peers—they are hearing it from their teachers and parents. Not good.

So your ox may not be getting gored right now, but just wait! If any part of your livelihood is based on copyright—as a writer, reader, publisher—and you don't support the principal of copyright protection in how you live, how you raise your kids, how you value other's work, consider the consequences. Please.

I do wonder what will happen when these kids actually need to make money from their work—will the 'everything should be free' tune change? Or will they just continue to live with their parents during their creative phase? Or will we see a dearth of new artists, because they can't make any income from their creative work? Will only those creative self marketers survive? Interesting....

In fairness the system for determining and acquiring rights is cumbersome and needs a major overhaul. Also many copyright holders and businesses have chosen to make their material available gratis for many reasons.

That is their choice. I believe the content creator or rights holder should be able to have that choice. It's your body of content. Don't let people use it without permission.