Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America

Posts Tagged ‘Google Book Settlement’

Judge grants preliminary approval to Google Book Settlement

Friday, November 20th, 2009

U.S. District Judge Denny Chin has granted preliminary approval to the revised Google Book Settlement, which was filed on Friday.  He has set the date for the fairness hearing on February 18th, 2010.

The Open Book Alliance, of which SFWA is a member, has a  post-mortem of the revised settlement on their website, as has SFWA’s own Victoria Strauss. OBA released a statement today in response to the preliminary approval.

“Today, in an expected procedural move, Judge Denny Chin granted preliminary approval to the revised Settlement of Google’s copyright infringement lawsuit. This is not a surprising development and is not any indication that the court will or will not accept the terms of Settlement 2.0. The same procedural preliminary approval was given to Settlement 1.0, and now sets up a court process that will allow those opposed to the revised settlement to let their objections known to the court. The U.S. Department of Justice has until February 4th to weigh in with the court, as their investigation into the matter continues.”

SFWA will continue to keep you posted as events develop.

Tags: Google Book Settlement
Posted in News, SFWA Blog | No Comments »

Podcast: Google Book Settlement at WFC

Saturday, November 14th, 2009

At World Fantasy there was a one-hour panel on the Google Book Settlement with Russell Davis, Karen Wester Newton, Charles Petit, Jay Lake, Christopher Kastensmidt, and Dan Gamber moderating. Though all agreed that the panel was too short it covered some good ground.

Sorry you missed it? Not to fear, Rick Kleffel’s Agony Column has the full podcast of it.

Here’s what the website/little book had to say about this (death) panel:

“The Google Books Settlement has caused worldwide controversy and will have a marked effect on every author and publisher. Hear various viewpoints on this issue.”

It’s sort of like saying, “Well, you can throw this match in that pool of gasoline, but there might be some side effects.”

Animated does not do this panel justice. So, let me say, up front, that, whatever they’re paying Russell Davis for being the Prez of Sifwa (Science Fiction Writers of America): It ain’t enough. It ain’t nearly enough. That guy is a rockin’ firebrand, folks and if you doubt my words, well …

Click through to read the rest of his review of the panel or follow this link to the MP3 of the full panel.

Tags: c.e. petit, Christopher Kastensmidt, Dan Gamber, Google Book Settlement, Jay Lake, Karen Wester Newton, podcast, Russell Davis
Posted in Copyright Education, News, SFWA Blog | 2 Comments »

Victoria Strauss — Google Book Search Settlement Fairness Hearing Adjourned

Monday, September 28th, 2009

I’m a bit tardy on reporting this, but what can I say–I was on vacation last week, and didn’t bring my laptop. What’s more, I didn’t miss it a bit. No email, no blogging, no Twitter–bliss! Which just goes to prove that I’m not an Internet addict. No, not me. I can quit any…time…I…want…to.

Anyway.

Last week, the U.S. Justice Department’s anti-trust division urged the court to reject the Google Book Search Settlement, citing “concerns of the United States regarding class action, copyright and antitrust law.” (The full text of the DOJ’s brief can be seen here.) However, it urged the parties to continue discussion, since “a properly structured settlement agreement in this case offers the potential for important societal benefits, [and] the United States does not want the opportunity or momentum to be lost.”

As a result, the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers petitioned the court to adjourn the Fairness Hearing scheduled for 10/7, arguing that negotiations with the DOJ would substantially change the provisions of the Settlement and that, under those circumstances, it made no sense to seek approval of the current Settlement. On 9/24, Judge Denny Chin granted the petition. However, parties to the Settlement will still have to appear on 10/7, as Judge Chin has scheduled a status conference for that date.

In his adjournment order, Judge Chin noted that “the current settlement agreement raises significant issues, demonstrated not only by the number of objections, but also by the fact that the objectors include countries, states, nonprofit organizations, and prominent authors and law professors.” However, “the proposed settlement would offer many benefits to society, as recognized by supporters of the settlement as well as DOJ…if a fair and reasonable settlement can be struck, the public would benefit.”

So…it’s back to the negotiating table. Meanwhile, Google faces a challenge in France, as the AFP (France’s publishers’ association) and Society of Authors contest Google’s digitization project in a court case that opened on 9/24.

I’ll be following these stories as they unfold.

I chose to opt out of the Settlement (for my reasons for doing so, see below). Now that the Settlement is off the table as it currently stands, that choice may be moot. Given my concerns about copyright, as well as the ways in which Google seems poised to monetize its vast digital library and the impact that may have on authors’ rights, I think there’s a good chance I won’t change my mind–but in light of what are likely to be substantial changes, it seems only fair that authors be given the opportunity to reconsider their decisions. It will be interesting to see if, in fact, we get that chance.

For reference, my previous posts on the Google Book Settlement:

4/28/09: Judge Extends Google Book Search Settlement Deadline

7/3/09: DOJ Investigates Google Book Search Settlement

8/14/09: SFWA’s Statement on Google Book Search Settlement

9/1/09: Google Book Search Settlement Deadline Looming

9/4/09: Why I Opted Out

Tags: Google Book Settlement, victoria strauss, Writer Beware
Posted in SFWA Blog, Writer Beware | No Comments »

US Justice Dept. urges rejecting current Google Settlement

Monday, September 21st, 2009

Today the US Justice Department’s team of lawyers urged U.S. District Court Judge Denny Chin in New York to reject the Google Book Settlement in its current form, citing “class action, copyright, and antitrust” concerns.  However, they go on to suggest continued negotiations, “Because a properly structured settlement agreement in this case offers the potential for important societal benefits, the United States does not want the opportunity or momentum to be lost.”

Read the Reuters article for more complete coverage.  Yahoo news has more quotes from the filing.

Tags: Google Book Settlement
Posted in Bulletin, News | Comments Off

Victoria Strauss — Google Book Search Settlement Deadline Looming

Friday, September 4th, 2009

Writers: The deadline for deciding whether to opt out of the Google Book Search Settlement is September 4, 2009. That means you have to decide today.

If you want to opt out, you must do so by September 4, or lose your chance forever. Opting out must be done in writing. You may opt out online, or send a written notice by US mail, postmarked on or before September 4 (instructions and address are here).

If you don’t opt out, you will automatically be included in the Settlement. You’ll then have until January 2010 to log in to the Book Search website, set up an account, and claim your work.

(Note: many of the links below are from the FAQ on the Google Book Search Settlement website.)

The Book Search Settlement covers all works published on or before January 5, 2009 (so if your work was published after that date, or is yet to be published, you aren’t affected), and anyone with a US copyright interest (don’t assume, if you’re not a US writer, that this doesn’t mean you–if your book was published or distributed in the USA, you may be included). “Works” means both books and inserts (shorter pieces included in a longer work).

Google defines a book as “a written or printed work” that meets the following conditions:

- It was published or distributed to the public or made available for public access under the authorization of the work’s U.S. copyright owner or owners on sheets of paper bound together in hard copy form; and
- It was registered with the U.S. Copyright Office, UNLESS the work is not a “United States work” under the U.S. Copyright Act, in which case such registration is not required; and
- It is subject to a U.S. copyright interest (either through ownership, joint ownership, or an exclusive license) implicated by a use authorized by the Settlement.

Google defines inserts as:

…forewords, afterwords, prologues, epilogues, poems, quotations, letters; textual excerpts from other Books, periodicals or other works; song lyrics; musical notation; children’s Book illustrations; or tables, charts and graphs that are not pictorial works.

The Settlement also creates the Book Rights Registry, which “represents the interests of Rightsholders in connection with this Settlement with Google as well as potential licensing deals with other entities, subject to Rightsholders’ authorization.”

What happens if you choose to remain in the Settlement? You’ll be able to “claim” your books and inserts, and receive some compensation for the ones that Google has digitized without permission. You’ll also be able to direct Google to remove one or more of your works from the Book Search database, request it not to digitize other works, and control whether and how it displays your digitized works (including whether they’re offered by Google–now and in the future–for sale or download). In exchange, you give up the right to sue Google for copyright infringement–though you do retain the right to object to the terms of the Settlement.

What happens if you opt out? You’ll lose the right to object to the terms of the Settlement, but retain the right to sue Google for copyright infringement. You can also request that Google not display any work of yours that it has digitized, and/or that it not digitize any further work. Google is currently “voluntarily” honoring these requests, though there’s nothing in the Settlement to compel it to do so, or to prevent it from changing its mind.

The Google Book Search Settlement is a sweeping agreement that shifts the ground on copyright, and has far-reaching implications for the future of books. Whether to opt in or out is a complex, difficult decision. Authors should strive to inform themselves as fully as possible (a tour of the links below should help with that), and should not allow themselves to be swayed by the small amount of money they may receive from Google if they remain in the Settlement.

The Authors’ Guild, one of the parties to the Settlement, provides an overview of the Settlement’s possible benefits. However, resistance to the Settlement has been mounting, both in the USA and overseas, and many organizations and individuals have filed objections or issued statements of opposition, including SFWA, the National Writers’ Union, the American Society of Journalists and Authors, and the Open Book Alliance (a coalition of organizations that includes some of Google’s biggest rivals). And the US Department of Justice is conducting an antitrust investigation.

As of this date, a surprisingly small number of individuals and groups have opted out or filed objections, but likely this will grow in the coming days. The Public Index is keeping track, with links to the documents. They make for instructive reading.

For the record, I oppose the Settlement (SFWA’s opposition statement pretty much sums up my reasons) and don’t want my books to be part of it. But I haven’t yet made up my mind whether to opt in and direct Google to remove my work from its database, or to opt out and risk that Google might decide to renege on its voluntary promise to exclude opt-outers. For me, opting out is morally preferable, but I fear that it is less real-life practical.

Edited to add: I should have noted that the Settlement has not yet been formally approved by the Court. This will happen (or not) as a result of a Fairness Hearing, which will be held October 7, 2009.

Whether the Settlement stands or not, the opt out decision must be made by September 4.

Tags: Google Book Settlement, victoria strauss, Writer Beware
Posted in SFWA Blog, Writer Beware | 1 Comment »

SFWA joins Open Book Alliance

Wednesday, September 2nd, 2009

SAN FRANCISCO, September 2, 2009 – The Open Book Alliance announced today that the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America (SFWA®) has joined the coalition of librarians, legal scholars, authors, publishers, and technology companies dedicated to countering the proposed Google Book Settlement.

“We are thrilled that SFWA® has joined our unique and diverse group of academic, professional, and industry organizations,” said Alliance co-chair Peter Brantley. “More and more, people across the spectrum of this issue are recognizing that the settlement as it is currently proposed is not the right way to bring about the promise of the mass digitization and distribution of books.”

Founded in 1965 by the late Damon Knight, Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America brings together the most successful and daring writers of speculative fiction throughout the world. Since its inception, SFWA® has grown in numbers and influence until it is now widely recognized as one of the most effective non-profit writers’ organizations in existence, boasting a membership of more than 1,500 professional science fiction and fantasy writers as well as artists, editors and allied professionals. Each year the organization presents the prestigious Nebula Awards® for the year’s best literary and dramatic works of speculative fiction.

“SFWA is excited to be a part of the Open Book Alliance, and we’re supportive of the work being done by this diverse group,” said Russell Davis, President of SFWA. “The members of this group makes clear that the concerns about the Google Book Settlement are shared by many organizations from numerous perspectives in publishing and other, related industries. As an organization, our concerns are myriad, as we indicated in our public statement issued on August 8th, 2009, which can be read at http://www.sfwa.org/2009/08/sfwa-statement-on-proposed-google-book-settlement, among them:

• The proposed Google Book Settlement potentially creates a monopoly by granting Google excessive power to control the market for out-of-print books that are offered to the general public.
• The “opt-out” mechanism proposed for the settlement contradicts the very foundation of copyright.
• By settling, Google never fully addressed and litigated the issue of copyright infringement/fair use, which was at the heart of the 2005 lawsuit brought forth by the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers. The settlement further obfuscates the issue of how Google’s scans and publication of the snippets should be treated under U.S. copyright law.

The Open Book Alliance will work to inform policymakers and the public about the serious legal, competitive, and policy issues in the settlement proposal. Other members of the Alliance include:

• Amazon (amazon.com)
• American Society of Journalists and Authors (asja.org)
• Council of Literary Magazines and Presses (clmp.org)
• Internet Archive (archive.org)
• Microsoft (microsoft.com)
• New York Library Association (nyla.org)
• Small Press Distribution (spdbooks.org)
• Special Libraries Association (sla.org)
• Yahoo! (yahoo.com)

In 2005, the Association of American Publishers (AAP) and the Authors’ Guild filed suit against Google, objecting to the company’s mass digitization of millions of books on copyright violation grounds. The parties privately settled for $125 million and devised a scheme that would permit Google to charge libraries and consumers for access to the digitized books. Under the deal, Google, the Authors Guild and the AAP would gain significant new powers to control the fledgling market for digital books.

The Open Book Alliance can be found online at http://www.openbookalliance.org, and on Twitter @OBAlliance.

Tags: Google Book Settlement, open book alliance
Posted in News, SFWA Blog | 3 Comments »

National Writers Union Opposes Google Settlement

Thursday, August 13th, 2009

August 13, 2009 — The National Writers Union today announced its opposition to the proposed $125 million settlement of a class-action copyright infringement lawsuit brought by writers and publishers against Google because its massive book-scanning project violated their copyrights.

“The proposed settlement is grossly unfair to writers,” said Larry Goldbetter, president of the National Writers Union, Local 1981 of the United Auto Workers. “It gives Google monopolistic control over access to many previously published copyrighted books and materials, and allows Google to collect and sell information about the reading habits of individuals.”

The NWU’s decision to oppose the settlement was approved by the union’s Delegates Assembly following three days of discussion last weekend in Chicago.

Though the NWU is not a party to the lawsuit, many of its 1,500 members – book authors, journalists, technical, academic and educational writers – will be directly affected by the settlement.

“More importantly, the economic well-being of all writers will be greatly impacted by precedents set by any court-approved agreement,” Goldbetter said.

“By scanning and digitally reproducing millions of copyrighted books and articles without permission by the writers, Google violated authors’ constitutionally protected rights,” Goldbetter said. “According to our understanding of the proposed settlement, writers whose copyrights were violated might receive a check for between $60 and $300 for each book and $15 per article,” he added. “Compared to the number and seriousness of the violations, the amount being offered by Google to each writer is ridiculously low. Also, of the $125 million offered by Google, only $45 million is for writers. This seems way short of the amount needed to compensate authors of millions of books,” he said.

The NWU also opposes the proposed settlement because it would give Google a license to reproduce a writer’s copyrighted work unless the writer specifically tells Google to remove his or her work from the program. This would apply to U.S.-based and foreign writers who might not be aware of the settlement and to those who presume – with good reason because it’s the law
– that their copyright protects them without the need to take further action.
“Putting the onus on writers to contact Google is also grossly unfair,” Goldbetter said, “Google is essentially saying ‘we are going to steal your work and sell it under terms we dictate unless you tell us not to.’ A corporation, no matter how powerful, shouldn’t be able to profit from your work without first contacting you and obtaining your permission in writing.”
Finally, “the NWU opposes the settlement because it interferes or might interfere with the relationship writers have with their publishers,” Goldbetter said. “The settlement makes assumptions about electronic rights that writers may or may not have assigned to publishers and it sets up an unfair binding arbitration process to resolve disputes between writers and publishers. These disputes must be arbitrated on a case-by-case basis. The settlement does not allow for writers, who were collectively targeted, to collectively negotiate to settle these disputes.”
The NWU’s decision to oppose the settlement is especially timely. Individual writers, publishers, organizations or anyone else who wants to opt out of the settlement, object to the settlement, intervene in the case, or file a “friend of the court” brief, must file his or her objections, notices or legal briefs with the Federal District Court in New York City by the close of business on Friday, Sept. 4, 2009. A hearing on the matter is set for Oct. 7, 2009.

The National Writers Union is the nation’s only labor union and advocacy organization for freelance writers in all genres, media, and formats. In addition to print media writers, NWU represents electronic writers and editors of blogs, e-newsletters and web sites. NWU is affiliated with the United Auto Workers (UAW) and the AFL-CIO. NWU’s headquarters are at 113 University Place, 6th floor, New York, NY 10003.

Tags: Google Book Settlement, NWU, press release
Posted in News, SFWA Blog | 2 Comments »

SFWA statement on proposed Google book settlement

Wednesday, August 12th, 2009

August 8, 2009

The Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers of America, Inc. (SFWA), in conjunction with outside counsel, has reviewed the terms of the proposed settlement between Google, Inc. and the Authors Guild, Inc., and other class action plantiffs. On April 19, 2009, SFWA’s Board of Directors voted to stay in the claimant group in regard to SFWA-owned copyrights so that SFWA has standing to file a formal objection to the proposed settlement with the court. This decision should in no way be seen as an approval of the proposed settlement, nor construed as advice to either our members or writers with potential claims in general. Put simply, in order to file an objection, SFWA must opt-in as a claimant; should we opt-out, we lose our ability to formally object with the court.

Though it is clear that the proposed Google Book settlement is well-intentioned, the problems are myriad and, in SFWA’s opinion, the terms should be reviewed with extreme care by authors, in particular those authors who write fiction. Some of the particular problems we have identified include:

• The proposed Google Book Settlement potentially creates a monopoly by granting Google excessive power to control the market for out-of-print books that are offered to the general public.

• The “opt-out” mechanism proposed for the settlement contradicts the very foundation of copyright.

• The financial impact on authors could be significant because the settlement would effectively thwart any third-party system from competing with Google and offering alternatives to authors of out-of-print works.

• The terminology of the Google Book settlement makes no distinction, nor does it provide a mechanism for discovering the difference, between works deemed out-of-print and works in the public domain.

• The class does not reflect the interested parties, primarily the holders of copyrights in “orphan works” where the rightsholder(s) cannot be identified or found.

• The Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers are poor representatives of the class as neither represents the types of work perhaps most significantly affected by the settlement, namely scholarly works.

• The class representatives do not include any authors of adult trade fiction, an obvious issue for SFWA.

• The class fails to consider fully licensees of works and fails to account for their interests.

• By settling, Google never fully addressed and litigated the issue of copyright infringement/fair use, which was at the heart of the 2005 lawsuit brought forth by the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers. The settlement further obfuscates the issue of how Google’s scans and publication of the snippets should be treated under U.S. copyright law.

Obviously, this is not an exhaustive list, but merely a sampling of some of the problems SFWA believes are inherent in the proposed settlement. SFWA is not advocating a particular course of action nor providing legal advice for individual authors, who should evaluate the proposed Google Book settlement based on their own situation and with the advice and input of their own legal counsel.

For the record, SFWA believes that the proposed Google Book settlement is fundamentally flawed and should be rejected by the court. With this public statement, we advise all authors and other writing organizations (in particular those who hold copyrights) to consult with legal counsel to ensure that they understand the precise meaning of the Google Book settlement, and the impact it may have on their own situation, should the settlement be approved.

For the Board of Directors,

Russell Davis

President

SFWA, Inc.

Tags: advocate, Google Book Settlement
Posted in Copyright Education, News, SFWA Blog | 8 Comments »

DOJ Officially Opens Investigation Into Google Book Search

Friday, July 3rd, 2009

We’ve been following the Google Book Search Settlement closely. Today, PCWorld reports that the U.S. Department of Justice has confirmed that it is investigating possible antitrust violations by the Google Book Search settlement.

In a filing to the judge overseeing the settlement of a lawsuit filed by The Authors Guild against Google, the DOJ informed the court that it has opened an investigation into the proposed settlement after reviewing public comments of concern. Those comments suggest that the agreement might violate the Sherman Act, a U.S. antitrust law, the DOJ said.

“The United States has reached no conclusions as to the merit of those concerns or more broadly what impact this settlement may have on competition. However, we have determined that the issues raised by the proposed settlement warrant further inquiry,” the letter reads.

It also says the DOJ has already demanded access to documents and other information from parties in the litigation and expects to have ongoing discussions with them as well.

There’s a hearing with Judge Denny Chin scheduled for Oct. 7, which is a full month after the September 4th deadline to make a choice about opting in or out.

Tags: Google Book Settlement
Posted in SFWA Blog | 2 Comments »

Another view of the Google Book Settlement

Tuesday, June 30th, 2009

The Google settlement has been one of the big topics for authors and publishers these days. ARS Technica reports on the position that Oxford Univeristy Press is taking. While this isn’t SFWA’s position, we thought it was interesting to see how another organization approached it.

The settlement between Google and book copyright holders has been examined by everyone from librarians to the US Department of Justice. Most of the issues identified by outside parties have focused on two issues: the market power it cedes to Google, and the ability of the public to access the knowledge that is contained in out-of-print works. The latest organization to weigh on the settlement is Oxford University Press, which occupies an interesting position, as it’s both a publisher of copyrighted works and has a mission of disseminating knowledge. As such, the position taken by the head of its US division is quite nuanced: the deal is flawed, but may be essential for maintaining the public’s access to knowledge.

Tags: Google Book Settlement
Posted in SFWA Blog | Comments Off