"Google Print" and Ethics

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
Date: August 12, 2005 7:06:30 PM EDT
To: Tim O'Reilly <tim () oreilly com>
Cc: dave () farber net, lauren () vortex com
Subject: "Google Print" and Ethics



Tim, et al.,

There are many issues involving Google that are not amenable to simple
technical analysis or fixes (e.g. people who complain that Google
ignores their pleas to remove privacy-invasive, defamatory, or
otherwise dangerous information posted in Google Groups -- this
is a tough nut to crack from many standpoints without simple solutions).

However, that's not the case with Google Print.  Let's put aside
legal issues for a moment.  I apologize, but I'm one of those
old-fashioned guys who believes in old-fashioned ethics.  From an
ethical standpoint, I can't find any possible way to warp the concept
of fair use into what Google has wanted to do with copyrighted works.

There are any number of parameters we could shuffle that would change
the equation in interesting ways:

  -- You suggested that it didn't matter that Google stood to make a
     lot of money from this (even though the copyright holders would
     be uncompensated).  I could not disagree more.  The issues
     might be very much different if Google were a nonprofit.
     They're not -- they're making money hand over fist.  What would
     be the community's reaction, I wonder, if Bill Gates had
     announced a similar plan for Microsoft to make their own copies
     of vast numbers of copyrighted works "borrowed" for free from
     university libraries?  The same?  Different?  I wonder.

  -- If Google bought and paid for the copyrighted books, or made
     prior arrangements with the publishers and copyright holders
     before scanning copyrighted works, then the situation -- though
     still not entirely clear -- would certainly be different, and
     the issue of copyright holders not being compensated would be
     off the table and not a concern.  Instead, Google made
     essentially a "sweetheart" deal with libraries that benefits
     Google vastly and also benefits the libraries, but pays not a
     dime to the copyright holders.

You also noted that publishers had been slow to bring their
materials online, and that, in essence, this will push them along.
I'm sorry, but whether or not publishers want their products online,
and under what conditions, are really decisions for them to make, not
you (except for your own publications, of course!)  Trying to ram
the online world down their throats, and without fair compensation at
that, is unethical at the very least, and that's true *regardless*
of how incredibly wonderful, useful, valuable, and exciting Google
Print might be if it included all of those copyrighted works.

This is all yet another example of an extremely worrisome sensibility
in some segments of the Internet world -- that somehow the virtual
world of the Internet exists (or should exist) outside and apart
from the rules of law and concepts of ethics that have long guided
us in the physical world.  It's obvious that laws must change and
evolve faster to keep pace with the rapid rate of technological
change -- many of today's technology-related problems are the result
of just such a lag.  But basic ethics should *not* be degraded in the
Internet world, simply by virtue of the facts that servers in
data centers and billionaire-based "coolness" are involved.

But like I said at the start, I'm old-fashioned about ethics.
Maybe the world just doesn't care about them any more ...

--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren () pfir org or lauren () vortex com or lauren () eepi org
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
  - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Co-Founder, EEPI
  - Electronic Entertainment Policy Initiative - http://www.eepi.org
Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
DayThink: http://daythink.vortex.com


 - - -



> From: Tim O'Reilly <tim () oreilly com>
> Date: August 12, 2005 5:23:04 PM EDT
> To: dave () farber net
> Cc: Ip Ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
> Subject: Re: [IP] Google Suspends Scanning Copyrighted Works -- For  
> Now
...

> It seems to me that Google's position, that scanning the documents in
> order to provide a service that allows potential readers to find
> which books contain the information they are seeking is indeed fair
> use, is a defensible position.  The fact that such a service has huge
> potential value to google is beside the point.
...


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/