Thank God For Good Lawyers:
Google Destroys Libraries, Not The Law
As we mentioned in Morning Docket, Google reached a settlement with publishers and authors to finally bring the Dewey Decimal System into the digital age.
Most lay people think that lawyers serve an annoying, anti-common sense role in society. But every now and again lawyers perform the important function of keeping “the law” safe from the forces of the free market and human progress.
Google wants to digitize the collections of the world’s greatest libraries in order to make them searchable. This is called “progress” and desperately needs to happen. But authors and publishers also need to protect their works — and make money off of them, if possible.
This issue demanded an out of court settlement, and lawyers from Keker, Debevoise, and other firms got the job done.
Under the settlement:
Authors and publishers will get 63 percent of revenue generated by Google’s electronic book database from the sale of online books and advertising. As part of the $125 million, Google will pay $34.5 million to set up the Book Rights Registry, which will collect the money and give it to the copyright owners. Another $45 million will go to authors and publishers that had their books uploaded without permission. Plaintiffs lawyers will take home $30 million.
Mmmm … fairness: the kind of fairness that cannot often be achieved through trial. Authors and publishers get 63% of the revenue (which, when you break it down will probably come out to 2 Lincolns per title). But, much more importantly, they will get the publicity that comes when people can actually read their book that is no longer popular enough to print. Google can then go about the business of bringing the entire digital world under their imperial control. And the lawyers got paid off too.
And nobody had to come up with a ridiculous “fair use” precedent that could have crippled the rights of authors for years to come.
Yay attorneys, yay settlements.
Google to Pay $125 Million in Settlement Over Book Digitization [Law.com]
Major Universities See Promise in Google Book Search Settlement [Authors Guild]
Proposed Settlement
(34) 
Comments
Firsty!
YAWN!
First almost first
Wishing I was first.
Trials bring the only true "fairness": complete domination of your weak and inferior opponents on the bloody field of winner-take-all battle.
Out of curiosity, when you write "two Lincolns", do you mean two cents (two pennies) or ten dollars (two five dollar bills)?. I assume two cents, but the point of you "breaking it down" for us is that I should not have to read the settlement papers to answer that question.
Thanks.
Eagle
For you myopic losers who post on this site, this deal will facilitate scholarship from the author's perspective and facilitate cite-checking from a journal research editor's perspective.
Poopin in a hat.
.....crickets.......crickets....
YAWN. But this is actually a good thing-lotsalove
i'm nervous about being punched in the face by my teacher
nervous t-10 1L
What does this have to do with sluts?
I used to tell this joke:
What do gay horses eat?
HAAAAY (changing the influction of my voice midway through the "AY" sound).
I will now tell this joke:
What do gay horses say?
YAAAAY
desperately needs to happen?
Elie sucks.
@6, I figured it was two cars?
I think that my eyes are bleeding after reading this post.
Teknologik!!!
HOW DO YOU ALL KNOW ELIE IS FAT?
HOW DO YOU ALL KNOW ELIE IS FAT?
HOW DO YOU ALL KNOW ELIE IS FAT?
HOW DO YOU ALL KNOW ELIE IS FAT?
HOW DO YOU ALL KNOW ELIE IS FAT?
Yeah damn that ridiculous "fair use" crap. Elie is obviously in the pocket of BIGPUBLISHING.
Authors should be looking to get their money from their own lawyers, not Google.
$30 mil seems ridiculous....
If only the idiotic soul destroyers at RIAA would be this smart and accept such a reasonable middle ground that adapts to new technology and protects everybody's rights in some way, they might be able to save the recording industry as we know it. Instead, their vapid executives will continue to care more about this quarter's profit statement than long-term viability; they'll continue suing 12 year-olds and their products, revenues, and public perception will continue it steep decline.
Yes, but can they digitize donuts, in all their lardy, frosted glory ? Inquiring chins want to know.
14: I completely agree. "Desperately" seems a bit much.
"Google wants to digitize the collections of the world's greatest libraries in order to make them searchable. This is called "progress" and desperately needs to happen"
Oops, a TechDirt post accidentally wound up here.
I like this post. Nothing to add but interesting stuff.
You should really stop trying to be so facetious in your writing. Its hard to follow which way you come out in this issue, dont equivocate sarcasm with insight.
ATL, define "library."
How can Google destroy a library by creating a library?
ATL, define "library."
How can Google destroy a library by creating a library?
ATL, define "library."
How can Google destroy a library by creating a library?