Google Inc. was sued by a major publishing association for digitizing library books without the permissions of copyright holders, the second such suit filed against the search engine giant.
The Association of American Publishers, based in Washington, D.C., sued the Mountain View, Calif., company on behalf of members The McGraw-Hill Companies, Pearson Education, Penguin Group (USA), Simon & Schuster and John Wiley & Sons. The suit seeks a court declaration that Google infringes the rights of copyright holders when it scans entire books and stores the digitized versions in its massive database. The trade group also wants a court order requiring Google to first obtain permission from copyright holders.
Legal experts say the spat between Google and the publishing industry is shaping up as a new front in the battle over digital duplication of media, including music, movies and now books.
Patricia Schroeder, AAP president and a former Colorado congresswoman said the suit was filed after talks broke down over the alleged copyright infringement implications of Google’s Print Library Project. The AAP had proposed that Google use each book’s unique ID number to determine if the work is under copyright, and then seek permission from the book’s owner. For more than 30 years, most books have carried an ISBN identification number, which is machine readable.
Google, according to Schroeder, refused.
If Google can scan every book in the English language, surely they can utilize ISBNs, Schroeder said in a statement. By rejecting the reasonable ISBN solution, Google left our members no choice but to file this suit.
While not mentioning the negotiations, Google said in a statement that the project is an "historic effort to make millions of books easier for people to find and buy."
Creating an easy-to-use index of books is fair use under copyright law and supports the purpose of copyright: to increase the awareness and sales of books, directly benefiting copyright holders, David Drummond, Google’s general counsel, said in a statement.
This short-sighted attempt to block Google Print works counter to the interests of not just the world’s readers, but also the world’s authors and publishers, Drummond said.
The AAP is coordinating and funding the suit, which the organization said has strong backing by the publishing industry. The 20-member AAP board, which represents the group’s more than 300 members, voted overwhelmingly to support the legal action.
The publishing industry is united behind this lawsuit against Google and united in the fight to defend their rights, Schroeder said.
While authors and publishers know how useful Google’s search engine can be and think the Print Library could be an excellent resource, the bottom line is that under its current plan Google is seeking to make millions of dollars by freeloading on the talent and property of authors and publishers, Schroeder said.
Google announced its Print Library Project last year, saying it planned to digitize books from the collections of Stanford University, Harvard University, the University of Michigan, Oxford University and the New York Public Library. The latter two are making available only books in the public domain.
In August, Google, which is working with five of the world’s great libraries to digitize their book collections, temporarily stopped scanning copyrighted books in the face of a growing outcry by publishers. The libraries have continued to scan public domain works, which are not covered by copyright.
The Google library project resumed scanning copyrighted works as well starting in November. The copyrighted books being scanned by libraries are for use in what amounts to a digital card catalog, Google and its backers argue.
Supporters of the Google Print project say the scanning of the full text of the books is necessary to create a searchable catalog of the books located within the five libraries’ collections. Google says it has no plans to make full copies of copyrighted works available without their owners’ permission.
In defending the library project, Google points to fair use, an exception in the U.S. Copyright Act that allows for the reprinting of portions of copyrighted material for certain purposes, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research.
Experts, however, argue over whether Google is protected under fair use. Those who side with the company point to a 2003 case, called Kelly vs. Arriba Soft Corp., in which a photographer sued a search engine for displaying thumbnail images of work that originally appeared on his Web site. The photographer claimed copyright infringement, but the Ninth Circuit ruled against him, saying that the act of copying the material, even for commercial purposes, was not exploitative and therefore was fair use.
The suit is the latest in a series of legal actions claiming Google is violating copyrights by making content available online without permission of those with rights to the material.
Additionally, the publisher of a US men’s magazine, Perfect 10, alleged that the Internet search giant is infringing on copyright by displaying thousands of pictures of nude women to which it holds rights.
The Agence France-Presse news agency has also sued Google for copyright infringement, claiming the search engine was displaying its news and photos without permission.