I imagine that after eight years of this, Judge Chin understands Google's business model(s) very well. The question "do they sell the scans" is a different question than "do they make money/expect to make money off the database." DLB
I'm somewhat conflicted about this. While I'm generally glad to see fair use expanded, I think the judge misunderstood Google's business model when citing in favor of fair use that Google "does not sell the scans". They clearly wouldn't do it if they were not convinced that making these books searchable is adding to their bottom-line by refining user profiles.
Felix
On 11/14/2013 06:39 PM, Dan L. Burk wrote:
I am so, so happy about this. Big win for the Free Culture movement.
I am not sure I would go that far. You still end up a very significant body of human knowledge controlled by a not-necessarily-benign corporation with a tendency toward information monopoly.
But Judge Chin's decision is the right one, and puts us on a much better road than the alternative.
DLB
--
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com |OPEN PGP: 056C E7D3 9B25 CAE1 336D 6D2F 0BBB 5B95 0C9F F2AC
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
-- School of Law University of California, Irvine 4500 Berkeley Place Irvine, CA 92697-8000 Voice: (949) 824-9325 Fax: (949)824-7336 bits: dburk@uci.edu