Paris, France — Google Inc.’s recently revised settlement might have satisfied some objections by authors and publishers, but the controversy may be far from over. Last week European Union ministers have gathered to counter plans by web giant Google to build a joint project on the digitization of books, French Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand said.
In fact, legal experts and industry analysts who have been closely observing the case believe the fight over Google’s ambitious book-scanning efforts is just starting all over again. The EU ministers argue that the project should not be controlled by the private sector alone.
The argument at hand is the ability of the Mountain View, Calif., search company to make available on the Internet digital copies of millions of out-of-print books and “orphan” books, works whose copyright holders cannot be found.
EU ministers assembled in Brussels on Friday, November 27, said they are musing over the formation of a committee of “wise men” to carve out a bloc-wide plan to digitize books, Mitterrand said in an interview with French newspaper Journal du Dimanche due to be published on Saturday.
He also said that the digital archiving of literature should not be controlled solely by private business alone, and that governments should play a part in any such initiative.
“The committee will be called for to bring together national views and draw up a joint position,” he told the newspaper. “It is not up to any individual organization to determine policy on a matter as important as the digitization of our global heritage. I’m not going to leave this issue up to simple laissez-faire,” he added.
European critics have lashed out at Google’s plan to scan millions of books and post extracts online is part of a settlement deal reached with the U.S. Authors Guild, for what they claim is the exploitation of the continent’s literary heritage, as well as on antitrust, copyright and privacy grounds.
Google was sued in 2005 by the Authors Guild and the Assn. of American Publishers, which claimed that the project violated copyright law. The Mountain View, Calif., company has also been taken to court in France over accusations it was illegally reproducing and distributing copyrighted material as part of its project.
An extended European digital library would be an answer to Google Books, which intends to digitize millions of books and documents from universities and libraries from around the world.
The EU already has a digital library, called Europeana, which became live in November 2008, but the platform has been plagued by a number of technical and usability issues.
Google agreed to a settlement in fall 2008, consenting to share 67% of any income produced by the project with authors and publishers. However, many have come out to renounce the agreement, which still expects a final sanction from U.S. District Judge Denny Chin, who is presiding over the case.
“His preliminary consent is just his procedural OK for the parties to go ahead” to the next step of the settlement process, said James Grimmelmann, a professor at New York Law School.
By giving his approval, Chin in fact reversed the clock for critics to lob their complaints, giving them until Jan. 28 to file additional objections. Foes include Google rivals Amazon.com Inc. and Microsoft Corp., as well as nonprofit groups such as Consumer Watchdog and the Internet Archive.
Both sides are set to square off before Chin at a Feb. 28 hearing in New York.
Asked whether the ministers were in favor of the Google settlement, Mitterrand said he could not comment for the moment.
“For my part, there is not any anti-Americanism. Nevertheless, I believe America is not a monolith, and different opinions must be expressed. That is why I do not want the State to surrender before the markets,” he said.
French publishers have accused Google of exploiting their country’s literary heritage and in September requested a Paris court to fine the Internet firm if it continues to digitize their books.
The proceedings has already been delayed twice — derailed first in June by authors who said they required more time to review the complex agreement, then again in October after the Department of Justice weighed in with concerns over antitrust issues and whether authors were given sufficient notice of the settlement. The tribunal expects to reach a decision by Dec. 18.