http://www.pcworld.com/article/171357/amazon_objects_to_google_books_settlement.html

"n a strongly worded letter, Amazon added its voice to the growing chorus of cries urging a court to reject the proposed Google Books settlement.

The proposed agreement "creates a cartel of authors and publishers ... operating with virtually no restrictions on its actions, with the potential to raise book prices and reduce output to the detriment of consumers and new authors or publishers who would compete with the cartel members," said Amazon's complaint, filed with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Google and a group of book publishers and authors came to an agreement about how to manage Google's efforts to scan books and make them digitally available after the publishers sued the search giant for copyright infringement. The settlement proposal, reached last October, is under review by the court.
...."

Microsoft and Yahoo are participating in the coalition too.

And reported today:

http://m.ft.com/cms/s/0/6bec0e02-9b12-11de-a3a1-00144feabdc0.html

"Google is to make concessions to European publishers and authors in an effort to stem a rising tide of anger over its landmark digital books settlement in the US.

The company has agreed to have two non-US representatives on the governing board of the registry that will administer the settlement, according to a letter sent to 16 European Union publishers’ representatives at the weekend, a copy of which has been seen by the Financial Times.

Google aims to digitise millions of books to make them searchable through its search engine.

According to the letter, it is also promising to consult European publishers before cataloguing some European works in its digital library.
...."

merged from "European Books" thread
http://blogoscoped.com/forum/160016.html
-----

The Wall Street Journal has a story by Peppi Kiviniemi titled "Google To Remove European Titles From US E-Book Settlement".

He says "In order to alleviate European concerns, Google has also promised to have two non-U.S. representatives on the governing board of the Books Rights Registry, which is being set up to govern the settlement."

Wasn't the Books Rights Registry supposed to be an independent organization? Why can Google dictate or influence who is on its board?

http://www.openbookalliance.org/2009/08/opening-the-book/

http://www.openbookalliance.org

George R: While I'm not familiar with the details, I reckon that <i>someone</i> has to first set it up.

I don't understand why all these groups would rather see out of print books mouldering on library shelves. If they get digitized, the authors again have an opportunity to collect royalties that today are impossible for them to get. That and the Constitution actually talks about copyright in terms of the *public good*, to insure that works are available. The clear implication there is that limited copyright is a necessary evil to encourage the arts – there is no endorsement of unlimited property rights for authors, which is what publishers would have you believe.
This has to all be posturing to try to squeeze more money out of Google.

A new objection I've heard is that, by going through the judicial process instead of Congress, Google may be changing copyright law through the courts.

While it's laudable to ask Congress to do something constructive, I think it's disingenuous to oppose the Google Books settlement on ostensibly procedural grounds.
What we should focus on is the merits of the settlement. If need be, I'm sure Congress could later enact more comprehensive legislation on these copyright issues.

If you oppose the Google Books settlement without pushing for Congress to make similar changes through legislation, then you're effectively opposing copyright reform.

Google is not changing any copyright laws or rules through this settlement.

There are many vested interests who are deliberately spreading a lot of FUD about this settlement. What they are doing is analogous to what is being done with the healthcare reforms in the US.

Let's be very clear: this settlement is not going to pass any rule which will prevent anybody – authors, copyright holders, publishers, book sellers – from doing anything in the future, that they can do now. In other words, all these people will continue to have the same rights in the future that they have today.

LL