Patricia Schroder Opposes Google Scanning Books

Patricia Schroeder, president
of the Association of American Publishers


For centuries, books have gone out-of-print and disappeared.

Now Google is doing something about that.

But not if Patricia Shroeder has her way.

The former Congresswoman from Colorado doesn't want Google to create a digital library.


If the idea of someone making copies in a library is supposed to fill me with fear, it doesn't. Besides...



Sounds like technology which will sell more books.

Just as the video-cassette recorder which the movie industry tried to stop in court resulted in more movie sales.


Also posted at www.speakspeak.org
a blog about The Media and Free Speech.

I'm so sick of them.

nt

It's her mindset.

.. postulated the premise that if we grant copyright 'in perpetuity' that we would 'statistically limit' free expression.

I agree.

There are only so many combinations of symbolic characters (for the written word, but it applies to all expression), and that only a small subset of these combinations result in what would be intelligible and even a smaller number which would be interesting and an even smaller number would be considered literature and an even smaller number would really be 'classics'.

In other words, the reuse of themes, ideas, plots, etc... is necessary to the human experience and condition that they MUST be recycled thru the ages to explain the current condition that they must NOT be walled off to ensure the profit of the descendants of the original copyright holders.

In other words, if we were to reserve all profits to the themes of shakespeare to his descendants, we would have nothing to write/film/sing/etc... about today.

We, as a society, take PROFIT as a motive as way too sacred.


Think about it.

after publication.

Not the life of the author plus 70 years.

:hi:

It's attitude. And Schroeder's attitude is primaeval.

Buy the book, buy the music, reward artists. It will all eventually be done via the internet.

after reading a few pages of it via a Google search.

for the eyes. I'm an old hippie who thinks this is great.

I personally have no problem with them scanning excerpts or selected passages...whole texts, well that's another issue altogether.

They want to scan the whole thing so it shows up in searches, but not reveal the whole book with the search-results.

as long as the plan doesn't change.

of those who wish to destroy file sharing...i thought only the republicans wanted to restrict my right to share information..

first you say for centuries books have disappeared

then you say google is doing something about that

then you attack shroeder

then you have the box which says the industry wants to block scanning of copyrighted works.

there is nothing here that says shroeder wants to block scanning of books that are out of copyright.

btw can I come to your house and take all your computer equipment in disregard for the current laws? copyright, property ownership, they are all obsolete.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

they're less likely to be available when they fall out of copyright, which may be 100 years after the death of the author.


Most books go out of print a lot sooner than they go out of copyright.

sorry but I could only cut and paste the text below and not also the link which you can find by searching "term of copyright books"


Copyright Term Extension Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
(Redirected from Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act)
Jump to: navigation, search

The Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 - altentatively known as the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act or the Mickey Mouse Protection Act - extended copyright terms in the United States by 20 years. Before the act, copyright would last until 50 years after the death of the author. After the act, copyright would last until 70 years after the death of the author, while copyrights for works of corporate authorship would last 75 to 95 years. The act also affected copyright terms for copyrighted works published prior to January 1, 1978, increasing their term of protection by 20 years as well. This effectively 'froze' the advancement date of the public domain in the United States for works covered by the older fixed term copyright rules. Under this act, no additional works made in 1923 or after, that were still copyrighted in 1998, will enter the public domain until 2019. Unlike copyright extension legislation in the European Union, the Sonny Bono Act did not revive copyrights that had already expired. The act did extend the terms of protection set for works that were already copyrighted, and is retroactive in that sense. However, works created before January 1, 1978, but not published or registered for copyright until recently are addressed in a special section, and may remain protected until 2047.
----------------
as for the merits of copyright law and copyrighted books being copied,
I think it is up to the copyright holders to decide if they would like to waive their rights granted by law and many certainly might if they thought there was a benefit. those who oppose this kind of law can run for office or vote for people who want to change the law.
or you can just say screw the law I want it now anyway, as another poster so eloquently stated...

"...i thought only the republicans wanted to restrict my right to share information.."


It may come as a surprise to this individual that the right to share information is NOT absolute, or else his/her social security number and security passwords would be fair game. Subsequently he/she would not complain when he/she was robbed blind. Nor would he/she be unhappy to come home and find all of his "information" had been hauled away by burglars.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts

to convince me that it's desirable for books not be scanned while they're under copyright?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

If copyrights are too long -- and many people think they are -- then the solution is to shorten their term, not to use the term as a justification for activities that would otherwise be illegal. (I don't know enough about Google's plan to know whether this particular idea is illegal.)

Incidentally, Shakespeare's themes, and even Stephen King's themes, are fair game. Under U.S. law, you can copyright words and images; you cannot copyright facts or ideas.

They can scan millions of books, though, and people will be able to find more books they need with a Google search.

kick