Google Book Settlement Rejected
A long saga ended today. A federal judge rejected a *Google settlement*<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704461304576216923562033348.html>that would allow it to post millions of *books* online. It shows that Google should not be allowed to make Global law through its opt-out (opt-in by default) rules to manage the world knowledge. Hong -- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
Dear Hong, yes, many of us have been waiting for this ruling, and had some concerns that Google's arguments would carry the day. Unfortunately, the link you provided does not seem to operate (at least here), so I'm providing another link, to The Guardian (I hope this one resolves), http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/23/google-online-library-plan s-thwarted The concerns voiced in Europe about the Google Book project underlined several points: - under the guise of an initiative in favour of civilization, Google has in fact developed a clever business model aimed at ensuring for itself a position of world dominance, with severe contract obligations imposed upon its partners; - potentially, the creation of a world monopoly, not on a product but on one of the treasures of human development, the visual support of knowledge; - transforming what has traditionally been a "public service" (public libraries) into a commercial venture, with the prospect of currently free or low-cost services becoming accessible only against payment; - a lack of transparency. A question to you, Hong: does Google have the possibility of appealing this latest judgment? Regards, Jean-Jacques. On 23/03/11 19:18, "Hong Xue" <hongxueipr@gmail.com> wrote:
A long saga ended today. A federal judge rejected a *Google settlement*<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487044613045762169 23562033348.html>that would allow it to post millions of *books* online. It shows that Google should not be allowed to make Global law through its opt-out (opt-in by default) rules to manage the world knowledge.
Hong
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
Dear Hong, All, in the e-mail I sent you a few minutes ago, the link turned out to be broken, just like the one you sent around. It's strange that this should happen just now when "googling" for articles on the ruling. So I tried another way, using Yahoo.fr instead of Google.fr, and found this short article (I do hope this works): http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/22/judgment_stalls_google_settlement/ If you know of any detailed analysis of the ruling, I'd appreciate getting the link to it. Regards, Jean-Jacques. On 23/03/11 21:32, "Jean-Jacques SUBRENAT" <jjs.global@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Hong,
yes, many of us have been waiting for this ruling, and had some concerns that Google's arguments would carry the day.
Unfortunately, the link you provided does not seem to operate (at least here), so I'm providing another link, to The Guardian (I hope this one resolves), http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/23/google-online-library-pla n s-thwarted
The concerns voiced in Europe about the Google Book project underlined several points: - under the guise of an initiative in favour of civilization, Google has in fact developed a clever business model aimed at ensuring for itself a position of world dominance, with severe contract obligations imposed upon its partners; - potentially, the creation of a world monopoly, not on a product but on one of the treasures of human development, the visual support of knowledge; - transforming what has traditionally been a "public service" (public libraries) into a commercial venture, with the prospect of currently free or low-cost services becoming accessible only against payment; - a lack of transparency.
A question to you, Hong: does Google have the possibility of appealing this latest judgment?
Regards, Jean-Jacques.
On 23/03/11 19:18, "Hong Xue" <hongxueipr@gmail.com> wrote:
A long saga ended today. A federal judge rejected a *Google settlement*<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704461304576216 9 23562033348.html>that would allow it to post millions of *books* online. It shows that Google should not be allowed to make Global law through its opt-out (opt-in by default) rules to manage the world knowledge.
Hong
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
EPIC participated in this case Our news item below includes a link to our page describing the many privacy concerns in the settlement as proposed. Regards, Marc Rotenberg. http://epic.org/2011/03/courts-rejects-google-books-se.html On Mar 23, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Jean-Jacques SUBRENAT <jjs.global@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Hong, All,
in the e-mail I sent you a few minutes ago, the link turned out to be broken, just like the one you sent around. It's strange that this should happen just now when "googling" for articles on the ruling.
So I tried another way, using Yahoo.fr instead of Google.fr, and found this short article (I do hope this works): http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/22/judgment_stalls_google_settlement/
If you know of any detailed analysis of the ruling, I'd appreciate getting the link to it.
Regards, Jean-Jacques.
On 23/03/11 21:32, "Jean-Jacques SUBRENAT" <jjs.global@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Hong,
yes, many of us have been waiting for this ruling, and had some concerns that Google's arguments would carry the day.
Unfortunately, the link you provided does not seem to operate (at least here), so I'm providing another link, to The Guardian (I hope this one resolves), http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/23/google-online-library-pla n s-thwarted
The concerns voiced in Europe about the Google Book project underlined several points: - under the guise of an initiative in favour of civilization, Google has in fact developed a clever business model aimed at ensuring for itself a position of world dominance, with severe contract obligations imposed upon its partners; - potentially, the creation of a world monopoly, not on a product but on one of the treasures of human development, the visual support of knowledge; - transforming what has traditionally been a "public service" (public libraries) into a commercial venture, with the prospect of currently free or low-cost services becoming accessible only against payment; - a lack of transparency.
A question to you, Hong: does Google have the possibility of appealing this latest judgment?
Regards, Jean-Jacques.
On 23/03/11 19:18, "Hong Xue" <hongxueipr@gmail.com> wrote:
A long saga ended today. A federal judge rejected a *Google settlement*<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704461304576216 9 23562033348.html>that would allow it to post millions of *books* online. It shows that Google should not be allowed to make Global law through its opt-out (opt-in by default) rules to manage the world knowledge.
Hong
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
Dear Jean-Jacques, Thanks for the links. Google has surely the procedural right to appeal to the relevant Circuit Court (2dn Circuit?), but I don't believe its likelihood of success if high. Instead Google may redraft the Settlement Agreement to shift from opt-out to opt-in, but that may shift its business model and profit prospective as well. Hong On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Jean-Jacques SUBRENAT <jjs.global@gmail.com
wrote:
Dear Hong,
yes, many of us have been waiting for this ruling, and had some concerns that Google's arguments would carry the day.
Unfortunately, the link you provided does not seem to operate (at least here), so I'm providing another link, to The Guardian (I hope this one resolves), http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/23/google-online-library-plan s-thwarted
The concerns voiced in Europe about the Google Book project underlined several points: - under the guise of an initiative in favour of civilization, Google has in fact developed a clever business model aimed at ensuring for itself a position of world dominance, with severe contract obligations imposed upon its partners; - potentially, the creation of a world monopoly, not on a product but on one of the treasures of human development, the visual support of knowledge; - transforming what has traditionally been a "public service" (public libraries) into a commercial venture, with the prospect of currently free or low-cost services becoming accessible only against payment; - a lack of transparency.
A question to you, Hong: does Google have the possibility of appealing this latest judgment?
Regards, Jean-Jacques.
On 23/03/11 19:18, "Hong Xue" <hongxueipr@gmail.com> wrote:
A long saga ended today. A federal judge rejected a *Google settlement*< http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487044613045762169 23562033348.html>that would allow it to post millions of *books* online. It shows that Google should not be allowed to make Global law through its opt-out (opt-in by default) rules to manage the world knowledge.
Hong
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
participants (3)
-
Hong Xue -
Jean-Jacques SUBRENAT -
Marc Rotenberg