Robert Darnton has published a new post summarizing why the Google Book Settlement has failed so far. From the article:
The cumulative effect of these objections, elaborated in 500 memoranda filed with the court and endorsed in large part by Judge Chin’s decision, could give the impression that the settlement, even in its amended version, is so flawed that it deserves to be pronounced dead and buried. Yet it has many positive features.
Josh Hadro has a new post discussing the Google Book Settlement rejection from the perspectives of librarians. From the post:
What librarians can look forward to instead: a renewed commitment from library advocates to make more content accessible to scholars and to the general public, whether via an alternative settlement agreement or legislative recourse.
James Grimmelman has a new post about the recent ruling against the Google Book Settlement. From the post:
The next judicial step will be a status conference on April 25 at 4:30 PM. That leaves a month for all concerned to figure out their plans for what happens as the case goes forward.
A judge in New York ruled against the Google Book settlement. Coverage from Forbes, Wall Street Journal and New York Times.
The Open Book Alliance has a new post outlining an EU investigation into the Google Book Settlement. From the post:
The Commission will investigate whether Google has abused a dominant market position in online search by allegedly lowering the ranking of unpaid search results of competing services which are specialized in providing users with specific online content such as price comparisons (so-called vertical search services)…
The AFP is reporting that Google is planning to scan part of Austria’s national library. From the post:
Under the deal, Google will cover the costs of digitising the collection — set at around 50 to 100 euros (60 to 120 dollars) per book — a sum the library says it was unable to raise without external funding.
Clint Boulton is reporting that the Google Book settlement has raised concerns from professional photography associations. From the post:
ASMP, the Graphic Artists Guild, the Picture Archive Council of America, the North American Nature Photography Association, the Professional Photographers of America and others allege that Google has scanned millions of books and other publications containing copyrighted images and displayed them to the public without the express permission of the visual creators.