Siva Vaidhyanathan writes his initial reaction to the Google Book/publisher settlement. Among his conclusions:
- “Overall, though, I have to offer my congratulations to both Google and the publishers. They forged a beneficial system that could make a difference to many authors, scholars, and researchers while making both Google and publishers a little money that they might otherwise never see.”
- “This settlement is the result of some masterful lawyering among parties that were more interesting in building something than tearing something down. So bravo.”
- “I am sympathetic to the claim that something is better than nothing and sooner is better than later. But sympathy remains mere sympathy. These claims are not convincing when one considers just how great an alternative system could be, if everyone would just mount a long-term, global campaign for it rather than settle for the quick fix.”
- “Now that Google has proposed establishing and running the central commercial clearinghouse for rights to much of the written work of the 20th century, we must reflect on how complicit some universities have been in centralizing and commercializing knowledge under a single corporate umbrella.”
- “At the core of this settlement is this fact that university libraries much confront: For the first time, elements of library collections will be offered for sale in widespread manner via a private contractor. Perhaps this is only a shift of degree. Perhaps it is a major mission shift. It’s worth a good argument, no?”
- “Ultimately, I have to ask: Is this really the best possible system for the universal spread of knowledge? I think we can do better. Watch this space to see how.”