Originally published September 23 2005
Another group stands against Google Library Print Project
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
Google's Library Print Project has its share of supporters and opponents, and C-Net News reports that the Text and Academic Authors Association (TAA), is the latest entity to join the latter group, which protests the search giant's plan to make the content of books in five major libraries accessible through its search engine.
Yet another publishing industry group is marshalling support to put a crimp into Google's plans to make the contents of many books available via its search engine.
The latest group to join the protest against Google's Library Print Project is the Text and Academic Authors Association, which maintains that the company's plan to scan the collections of five major libraries and make those materials accessible through its search engine is "backwards" and "in conflict with both the spirit and the law of copyright."
The TAA joins at least two other publishing groups that have criticized Google's plan, the Association of American Publishers and the American Association of University Presses.
All three of the groups contend that Google is essentially ignoring copyright law by making the published works available freely over the Internet.
Google, which is currently refusing all forms of comment to News.com, said this week that it has expanded the Library Print Project to offer people in American Samoa, Australia, Canada, India, Ireland, Jamaica, Kenya, Mauritius, New Zealand, Pakistan, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda and the United Kingdom access to the service.
However, Google has agreed to temporarily halt the scanning of copyright-protected books into its database.
The company is working on the project with libraries at Stanford University, Harvard University and other schools.
According to Richard Hull, TAA's executive director, Google's claim that the tool only allows people to view select passages in books where specific search terms appear provides unacceptable levels of copyright protection.
Google has maintained that it is giving authors and publishers the ability to opt-out of the library scanning program, but Hull believes that putting the burden on copyright holders to get in touch with the company is an "onerous requirement."
"We don't like the opt-in approach," he said.
"For each book that is under copyright, Google should be forced to seek permission, I'm not sure why existing laws don't apply here.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml