Google Book Search: fragwürdige Copyright-Regelung

[:de]Nach der ersten Erfolgsmeldung folgt nun die Kritik an der Vereinbarung von Google mit den US-Autoren. Offenbar hat die Harvard-Universität grosse Bedenken bezüglich des Vertrags, der viele urheberrechtliche Fragen offen lässt. Auch sei das Kostenmodell von Google intransparent und fragwürdig. Entsprechend macht Harvard nicht mit – obschon sie einer der grossen Partner von Google bei der Book Search sind. Allerdings fordert Harvard, dass sich die Online-Publikation auf die älteren Werke beschränkt, die frei von Urheberrechten sind.

Eine entsprechende Meldung hat Lesley Ellen Harris über liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu verbreitet:

from the Harvard Crimson –

“Harvard University Library will not take part in Google’s book scanning project for in-copyright works after finding the terms of its landmark $125 million settlement regarding copyrighted materials unsatisfactory, University officials said yesterday. “Harvard had been one of five academic libraries, along with Stanford, Oxford, Michigan, and the New York Public Library, partner with Google when the book scanning initiative was announced in October 2004. University officials said that Harvard would continue its policy of only allowing Google to scan books whose copyrights have expired. …

“In a letter released to library staff, University Library Director Robert C. Darnton, said that uncertainties in the settlement made it impossible for HUL to participate. “As we understand it, the settlement contains too many potential limitations on access to and use of the books by members of the higher education community and by patrons of public libraries,”Darnton wrote. “The settlement provides no assurance that the prices charged for access will be reasonable,” Darnton added, “especially since the subscription services will have no real competitors [and] the scope of access to the digitized books is in various ways both limited and uncertain.” He also said that the quality of the books may be a cause for concern, as “in many cases will be missing photographs, illustrations and other pictorial works, which will reduce their utility for research and education.”

Lesley Ellen Harris

www.copyrightanswers.blogspot.com[:en]Nach der ersten Erfolgsmeldung folgt nun die Kritik an der Vereinbarung von Google mit den US-Autoren. Offenbar hat die Harvard-Universität grosse Bedenken bezüglich des Vertrags, der viele urheberrechtliche Fragen offen lässt. Auch sei das Kostenmodell von Google intransparent und fragwürdig. Entsprechend macht Harvard nicht mit – obschon sie einer der grossen Partner von Google bei der Book Search sind. Allerdings fordert Harvard, dass sich die Online-Publikation auf die älteren Werke beschränkt, die frei von Urheberrechten sind.

Eine entsprechende Meldung hat Lesley Ellen Harris über liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu verbreitet:

from the Harvard Crimson –

“Harvard University Library will not take part in Google’s book scanning project for in-copyright works after finding the terms of its landmark $125 million settlement regarding copyrighted materials unsatisfactory, University officials said yesterday. “Harvard had been one of five academic libraries, along with Stanford, Oxford, Michigan, and the New York Public Library, partner with Google when the book scanning initiative was announced in October 2004. University officials said that Harvard would continue its policy of only allowing Google to scan books whose copyrights have expired. …

“In a letter released to library staff, University Library Director Robert C. Darnton, said that uncertainties in the settlement made it impossible for HUL to participate. “As we understand it, the settlement contains too many potential limitations on access to and use of the books by members of the higher education community and by patrons of public libraries,”Darnton wrote. “The settlement provides no assurance that the prices charged for access will be reasonable,” Darnton added, “especially since the subscription services will have no real competitors [and] the scope of access to the digitized books is in various ways both limited and uncertain.” He also said that the quality of the books may be a cause for concern, as “in many cases will be missing photographs, illustrations and other pictorial works, which will reduce their utility for research and education.”

Lesley Ellen Harris[:]