Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
> Indeed they did not, which is why they are not legal parties to the
> settlement.
>
> They still signed a contract with Google to provide Google access to
> the physical items to scan them. If they wanted certain benefits out
> of this, they should have negotiated to have those benefits in their
> contracts.
They did, and many of the contracts are public (all of the ones from
publicly funded universities). They are even linked off the partners
area of the GBS page, and "can i see the contracts" is one of their
FAQs. Those, however, are the old contracts. The proposed new contracts
(that libraries will need to sign once the settlement is legalized) are
in appendix B of the settlement documents. (Linked from this page:
http://books.google.com/booksrightsholders/). Those new contracts are
currently being negotiated -- in other words, the partner libraries are
working out details and trying to get modifications of those contracts
before signing them.
What is weird to me, as a non-lawyer, is how G can get out of its
current contracts (most of which would be valid for another few years)
and replace them with new contracts that are mandated by this lawsuit. I
think it requires the cooperation of the libraries, but IANAL.
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 Tue Mar 03 2009 - 15:03:51 EST