from Hacker News

Google Book Search settlement gives Google a virtual monopoly over literature

by anuraggoel on 4/18/09, 8:27 PM with 17 comments

• by nopinsight on 4/19/09, 2:37 PM

  I would rather have book search results available as fair use, instead of through legal settlement. That would allow other companies to compete in this area.

  With this deal, Google's dominance in search engine market is even more secure than it has been. We don't want yet another monopoly, even a purportedly benevolent one.

  To compensate Google for the cost of scanning all these books, perhaps the publishers and author's guild should force Google to license the scanned version to other companies at a 'fair' price, which they also need to agree upon.

• by jedc on 4/19/09, 9:31 AM

  The thing that strikes me about all this craziness over Google Book Search is that Google did an extraordinary thing: they made significant progress toward scanning every book ever printed. With great effort (and risk) comes great reward. It would be a huge cost, but I don't see why another company doesn't try to do the same thing.

  The monopoly doesn't exist because Google is trying to force other people out; it exists because no other company is willing to take the expense/risk to do it themselves.

• by indiejade on 4/18/09, 10:44 PM

  Google, in acceding to the Authors Guild's requests, have attained a legal near-monopoly on searching and distributing the majority of books ever published.

  Incorrect grammar. Should read: "Google, in acceding to the Authors Guild's requests, has attained a legal near-monopoly on searching and distributing the majority of books ever published."

  Company names should always be referred to in the singular object form, as in "it", not "they" or "them".

  Mr. Doctorow, is Boing Boing hiring any editors? ;)