The noblest of all dogs is the hot dog. It feeds the hand that bites it - Hot Dog Restaurant
|
|
|
Google's online book deal in trouble
THE OPEN BOOK ALLIANCE (OBA) appears to have managed to get one over on Google by calling in the US Department of Justice (DoJ) over the Google Books settlement.
The OBA lobbied the DoJ to intervene against the Google book agreement. Yesterday the DoJ stepped in to object to the settlement.
The DoJ said in comments filed with the US District Court for the Southern District of New York that the revised settlement agreement "suffers from the same core problem" as Google's initial attempt, and could lend the company "significant and possibly anticompetitive advantages."
The settlement would make Google "the only competitor in the digital marketplace with the rights to distribute and otherwise exploit a vast array of works."
The DOJ was not that happy with Google's initial attempt at a settlement agreement, reached in the fall of 2008. That first settlement also wasn't inclusive enough and risked limiting competition, the DOJ had said, helping send the company and plaintiffs in the case back to the drawing board.
The case was started when the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers sued Google in 2005, complaining that the company's digital scanning of books violated copyright protections.
The settlement means that Google could rule digital books market, which means its project to scan whole libraries will pay off.
But the Open Book Alliance, which includes Microsoft, Amazon, Yahoo and the National Writers Union, has opposed Google's second attempt at a settlement.
In its own brief filed in opposition last month, the Open Book Alliance called it "a sham and a fraud on the public," that furthers Google's aim to "restructure the publishing industry and to control Web commerce."
In a statement the Open Book Alliance said that the Department of Justice has made it crystal clear that the proposal before the court is overreaching and cannot be approved: "... the United States has reluctantly concluded that use of the class action mechanism in the manner proposed by the ASA is a bridge too far."
It was relieved that the Government identified the anti-competitive consequences this proposal would have on digital book sales and the search market, concerns that were voiced by the Open Book Alliance and its members.
It is starting to look like that even if Google is allowed its settlement then the DoJ might drag it back to court on an antitrust charge. µ
Share this:
Share
I'm not claiming to agree or disagree, but I did some research on the Internal Revenue Code(Title 26 of the 50 Titles of US law) and I found absolutely no resemblance between what I read and what the government claims the law says.
I suspect it is the same for just about every other major law document out there.
People claim anarchy doesn't work, but if people don't actually realize they're living in an anarchy than it might actually have a chance. It just wouldn't be an anarchy that most Anarchists intended. And it would equate to slavery. Try googling the definition of peonage and see how closely it resembles what we have now.
If anyone hasn't heard of this project, it's to scan in every book ever published. IF made publicly available in digital form, that'd be wonderful, BUT I'm sure that not far down the road go_ogle will simply claim to OWN all those works. -- And wouldn't it be handy for the coming police state to "legally" suppress all those inconvenient old ideas of liberty? See elsewhere for go_ogle now merging with NSA.