Google Book Settlement and Orphan Works

Today a final settlement hearing on the Google Book Settlement is slated to take place.  Part of the settlement calls for the creation of an independent registry for orphan works, which will make them more widely available to the public. Orphan works are copyrighted works where it is difficult or impossible to identify or locate the copyright holder (ALA, 2009). There are millions of orphan works that cannot be accessed or used (Peters, 2008). The settlement may give Google an exclusive advantage to become the sole entity to license the display of orphaned works (Siy, 2009). This has implications for libraries who may have to subscribe to the full display of orphaned works or not be able to provide access to users. Currently, anyone can be sued for copyright infringement even when a good faith effort is made to find the copyright holder (ALA, 2009). In 2006 the U.S. Copyright Office published a report of an investigation of orphan works that recommended limiting remedies for copyright infringement to users who performed reasonably diligent searchers to find the copyright holder but were not successful (ALA, 2009). The report also recommended that noncommercial users not receive damages if the user ceases infringement in a timely manner after being notified by the copyright owner (ALA, 2009). Since 2005, the Google Book Project has been scanning the collections of several major research libraries (Google Books, 2010). Both the Authors Guild and Association of American Publishers submitted class action lawsuits against Google for copyright infringement (Electronic Frontier Foundation, 2006). The parties began to negotiate the terms of a settlement out of court. Because earlier legislation died and the Google settlement has moved forward, the settlement will shape access to orphan works. Orphan works legislation was introduced in 2008 but died. A Google Book Project settlement updated version was released in November 2009. Under the terms, Google will fund a Book Rights Registry to dispense funds to copyright holders (Siy, 2009). One significant aspect of the settlement is that authors will be prohibited from suing Google (but can potentially sue a third-party licensing body— Google’s competition) for displaying unclaimed works if Google receives permission from a to-be-created independent body of the Books Rights Registry (Siy, 2009). American Libraries Association, Association of Research Libraries, and the Association of College and Research Libraries (2009) filed a joint letter to Deputy Assistant Attorney General recommending that the court review the pricing of the institutional subscription to realize rights of rights-holders, to ensure broad access to the Books by the public, and to make sure that perspectives of academic authors, as well as libraries, are taken into account. References American Library Association (ALA). (2009). Retrieved January 28, 2010 from http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/copyright/activelegislation/orphanworks/index.cfm Association of Research Libraries (ARL), ALA, Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL). (2009, December 10). Google Library Project Settlement. Retrieved February 7, 2010, from http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/antitrustdivasa-final.pdf Authors Guild, Inc., Association of American Publishers, Inc., et al. v. Google, Inc., No. 05 CV 8136-DC (S.D. NY 2010). Amended Settlement Agreement. Retrieved January 31, 2010, from http://www.googlebooksettlement.com/r/view_settlement_agreement Butler, B. (2010, February 10). The Google books settlement: second round comments. Association of Research Libraries. Retrieved February 14, 2010 from http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/gbs-pasa-summary.pdf Competition and Commerce in Digital Books: Hearing before the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, 111 Cong. 1 (2009, September 10). Retrieved February 6, 2010 from http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/hear_090910.html Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2006). U. of Michigan’s Prez. Retrieved February 7, 2010 from http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2006/02/u-michigan-prez-googles-digitization-project-about-public-good Google Books (2010). History of Google Books. Retrieved February 7, 2010 from http://books.google.com/googlebooks/history.html H.R. 5889, 110^th Congress. (2008). Retrieved January 31, 2010, from http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.5889 “Orphan works” problem and proposed legislation: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, 110 Cong. 2 (2008, March 13) (testimony of Marybeth Peters). Retrieved January 30, 2010 from http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat031308.html Siy, S. (2009, November 17). The New Google Book settlement. Retrieved January 30, 2010 from http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/2770 U.S. Department of Justice. (2010, February). Statement of Interest of the United States of America regarding proposed class settlement. Retrieved February 7, 2010 from http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f250100/250180.pdf