« An index is data tooFoxes making book coop »

Settle for Profit or Distribution


Settle for Profit or Distribution


The proposed Google Book Settlement contains a significant number of assumptions concerning the motives of the participants.  One of the most obvious is that authors and publishers are in it, to put it crassly, for the money. 

That might not always be a good assumption.  Let's say the author of a book, in full possession of rights, wanted to include her book in Google Book Search, and make it freely available for use under a Creative Commons Attribution, NonCommercial, Share-Alike license.  The author might not feel the work is likely to generate much additional revenue, or regardless, wants her work to be broadly and widely accessible to the greatest number of readers possible. 

How would she do this under the settlement?  Is it possible?  Would she have to opt out?

The default assumption is that works would be fixed with a pre-determined (algorithmically derived) price:

(4.2)  Default Pricing Option.  If the Rightsholder of a Book has not specifically directed that its Book be sold at a Specified Price, then Consumer Purchase of that Book will be sold at the Settlement Controlled Price.

The immediately prior clause states that the author can specify their own price:

(4.2)  Specified Price. In this option, the Rightsholder identifies the price for which it wants its Book authorized for Consumer Purchase to be sold. This pricing option is referred to in this Settlement Agreement as the "Specified Price."  The Specified Price may only be changed by the Rightsholder and is not subject to Article IX (Dispute Resolution).

Does this mean that the author can set a price of "free" -- and more importantly, if they can -- is there any mechanism by which to convey the license (Creative Commons or other) under which that freedom of access is governed? 

One potential problem with this settlement is it's enforcement of a set of license and pricing assumptions that might be difficult to unbundle.  In this fashion, the settlement assumes the primary motivation is profit maximization, not distribution to the greatest number.

Nov 11, 2008 | Categories: MassBooks, DigLibs, eBooks, BookRights, Publishers | pbrantley

2 comments

Comment from: Adam Corson-Finnerty [Visitor] Email
Yes, but a rightsholder is a rightsholder. Signing up with the Registry does not mean that an author has given exclusive rights to Google. They can still give Creative Commons rights to their work, which would mean that any non-for-profit entity (like IA's Open Library) could mount the work for display, download, and print.
11/13/08 @ 02:44
Comment from: Dan Clancy [Visitor] Email
Good question Peter. The simple answer is yes. A rightholder will be able to set the price to 0 or for that matter any other price they might desire. Similarly there should not be any problem with identifying license terms that they may be using such as Creative Commons. (I am on the book search team and wa very involved in the agreement.)
11/13/08 @ 22:21

Leave a comment


Your email address will not be revealed on this site.

Your URL will be displayed.
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Name, email & website)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will not be revealed.)
7 + 3= ?
antispam test
This is the personal blog of Peter Brantley, and the opinions expressed here are his own and are not reflective of any of his employers in the continuum of history, or the University of California, which provides support for this blog.

Join EFF today

Recent Posts

Search

Subscribe

  • RSS
  • Bloglines
  • MyYahoo!
  • MyMSN
  • Newsgator
  • Google Feeds
How to subscribe
multiple blogs

Server manager: contact