Here's the +Techdirt
And their point: ...different authors would have very different issues (especially on the fair use analysis), but also because lots and lots of authors didn't seem to have a problem with what Google was doing (especially considering studies that have shown being in Google Books helps sell more books).
As +Lauren Weinstein
would say, the Authors Guild case is orthogonal to the author's case because the Guild claims to be representing the authors when it seems that it's not.
Here are the issues:Privacy
The products and services envisioned by the proposed settlement will give Google not only an unprecedented ability to track our reading habits but to do so at an unprecedented level of granularity. Because the books will be accessed on Google's servers Google will not only know what books readers search for and access but will also know which pages they read how long they stayed on each page what book they read before and which books they access next. This is a level of reader surveillance that no library or bookstore has ever had.The Case
The case began in 2005 when the Authors Guild sued Google for digitizing books as part of the Google Book Search program called "Google Print" at the time. Through partnerships with university libraries Google intended to scan books index the contents and provide both library users and the public with the ability to search through books. The Authors Guild complained that Google was "engaging in massive copyright infringement" by scanning books and that also that Google would be guilty of copyright infringement by displaying the search results to book-seeking users
After a couple of years of litigation the Authors Guild and Google proposed a massive complex settlement in October 2008 setting off waves of controversy. In it the Authors Guild sought to allow Google to continue scanning books
and moreover would allow Google to offer readers previews for free
and full access to books for a fee through a few different models
. In exchange Google planned to pay a portion of those fees back to the publishers and authors through the Book Rights Registry
a separate non-profit entity created by the settlement and intended to represent the interests of authors and publishers.
The initial settlement resulted in a litany of objections from groups as varied as the US Department of Justice public interest groups foreign governments authors publishers physical and digital book retailers library associations and more. After the objections were filed the Authors Guild and Google were given extra time to amend the settlement.
Basically, Google tried to simplify a straightforward process and ran into a quagmire of publishers' rights, etc.
There's a plan to pay for the infringement and a dogfight over who gets the dosh and how it will be dished out. +Electronic Frontier Foundation
supplied the rest of the information.