Google Print Has Legal Support

Though copyright law predates the Internet, case law has been established regarding the indexing of copyrighted material, and it has come out in favor of the indexer. Publishers who have issues with Google's Print for Libraries project may end up with little more than hurt feelings.

sent letters to Google asking them to stop the project as digitizing entire works of literature was a fundamental violation of copyright and would, in their opinion, hurt publishers and writers financially. "News of Google Print for Libraries came as a complete surprise. It had not been mentioned by Google representatives during any of the discussions they were having with our members, and Google's subsequent explanations of Google Print for Libraries have only increased that confusion and transformed it into mounting alarm and concern at a plan that appears to involve systematic infringement of copyright on a massive scale," read a letter written by Peter Givler on behalf of AAUP. Technically that's correct, Google has not received explicit permission or paid to reproduce the material. Instead, the search engine has gone through the 5 selected libraries which have given permission to digitize all or some of their collections. Though Google Google+library+search/2100-1032_3-5752085.html">privacy issues (involving cookies and the Patriot Act) remain unresolved. But all of these objections from publishers may yield little in court because of case law and Fair Use guidelines. As this do not supplant the need for the originals." As only snippets of copyrighted material are used, the need for the original is not supplanted in Google's case either. 3. although Arriba did copy each of Kelly's images as a whole, it was reasonable to do so in light of Arriba's use of the images. It was necessary for Arriba to copy the entire image to allow users to recognize the image and decide whether to pursue more information about the image or the originating web site. If Arriba copied only part of the image, it would be more difficult to identify it, thereby reducing the usefulness and effectiveness of the visual search engine. A copy of the whole is necessary to be able to search the contents effectively. 4. The search engine would guide users to Kelly's web site rather than away from it. Snippets, if attractive to the needs of the searcher, would drive traffic to a potential purchase, creating a huge benefit for publishers and authors. Chances are Google's legal team knew what it was getting into before it began, knowing the case law to support such an action. The choice to opt out of the program showed some bend on Google's part, an attempt to maintain a relationship, when in legal reality, the search company, in the US at least, doesn't have to give up much.