Open Access News

News from the open access movement


Monday, November 28, 2005

Another book publisher mistakes Google indexing for reprinting

William Rees-Mogg, Help, we've been Googled! London Times, November 28, 2005. Rees-Mogg is the chairman of Pickering & Chatto, a small publisher of limited-circulation academic books bought mainly by libraries. Here's his key complaint:
Obviously Google has every right to republish books that are out of copyright. The question concerns books that are still in copyright and will remain so for 70 years or more. If Google can scan these books, without the permission of the publisher, and include them in its database, then most libraries will not need to buy them. And if librarians do not buy them, they cannot be published.

Comment. But this is just wrong. If the books are indeed under copyright, then Google will offer only short snippets, not full text. Libraries that have wanted P&C's print books will still want them after them after snippets are available through Google Library. Moreover, P&C may always exclude its copyrighted books from Google scanning. But perhaps P&C is really thinking about its public-domain books, such as the complete works of Daniel Defoe. It's possible that Google scanning of these books, coupled with its policy to provide free online full-text for reading, will undermine library sales and hurt P&C's business. But in that case, P&C's objection is less clear. If it wants protection from this threat, then we have to ask which is worse, Google's decision to take advantage of its right to use public-domain literature or a publisher's attempt to re-enclose the commons and extend copyright-like control over public-domain literature?

Update. Tony Sanfilippo makes an argument very similar to Rees-Mogg's, but on behalf of the Penn State University Press, in today's issue of Centre Daily Times.