Hahn, Harvey wrote:
> Another point of view: one can now clearly see the difference in access
> between a commercial entity doing the digitizing and an "open" entity
> doing it for the benefit of all humanity both now and in the future. I
> think the question had been asked earlier on this list, but Google's
> access "answer" seems pretty definitive about "who controls the data
> controls the rules".
Being a very large, US company, I think that Google's access "answer"
has everything to do with covering its butt. In the US, there is a
provision in the DMCA that basically allows them to make a "mistake" in
their copyright assessment as long as they have a mechanism to correct
that mistake once it's pointed out (known as a "takedown policy"). Other
countries don't have that "out" ASAIK, so Google isn't protected in the
same way by their laws.
The advantage that some libraries here have, especially those that are
state institutions (as opposed to private institutions) is that the
state institutions have a certain immunity from liability in copyright
law. I can't remember what it's called (any lawyers on the list?), but
essentially they can only be sued for actual damages... which are
virtually impossible to quantify and therefore practically impossible to
present to a court. So Michigan or the University of California can be
"looser" in their actions than, say, Harvard or Stanford.
kc
--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
Received on Sat Sep 08 2007 - 20:30:03 EDT