Monthly Archives: June 2009

Peter Suber at Open Access News points out a recent post by Peter Eckersley regarding the Google book settlement. In the post, Eckersley argues that Google should be required to place the raw scans in a neutral repository, such as the Library of Congress, which would be made available openly after a period of time. From Suber’s commentary:

I like this idea very much, and not just because it supports OA and not just because it’s a compromise that stands a chance of being adopted. Many, and perhaps most, of the books Google is scanning are provided by public universities and libraries which acquired and curated them using public funds. (Even the private universities and libraries providing books are supported by public subsidies through untaxed property and tax deductible contributions.) Eckersley’s argument that the job is too large to repeat is sound –i.e. the non-exclusivity of Google’s rights is just a formality. But it can be buttressed by the argument that the public already has an investment in this project and should get more out of it than the opportunity to buy access from a new private monopoly.