conference "Cooperating for innovation: devices for collective exploration"
Dear colleagues, The interdisciplinary institute on innovation (i3), which brings together researchers from Mines ParisTech and Telecom ParisTech, is pleased to invite you to the conference"Cooperating for innovation: devices for collective exploration" which will take place on December the 2nd at Telecom ParisTech (46 rue Barrault, 75013 Paris). You will find a short presentation of the conference below. The full program is enclosed and also available on the conference website: http://www.i-3.fr/conference-2/important-dates-and-programme/ Participants should register at http://www.i-3.fr/conference-2/registration-and-venue/. *** 1st Interdisciplinary Innovation Conference “Cooperating for innovation: devices for collective exploration” Paris, 2 December 2013 Conference theme Innovation activities face a threefold challenge today: they build on the advancement of science and include an increasingly strong technological component; they involve a growing number of actors, among whom large corporations, high-technology start-ups, public research organizations, and user associations; they are to take into account various stakeholders’ concerns which extend beyond a mere economic or financial logic. In other words, innovation becomes – or at least attempts to become - increasingly disruptive, open, and responsible. The uncertainty inherent to innovation hence bears not only on the odds of success, but also on the nature of scientific knowledge to build and leverage, on the identity of partners to enroll, and on the evaluation criteria to rely on. Marked by this threefold uncertainty, innovation regimes pertain to the exploration of new possibilities, rather than the exploitation of things already known, as James March famously put it. The conference will investigate new forms of organizing collective action given the uncertainty inherent in exploratory innovation. This issue will be addressed through the analysis of practices and devices that are put forward and tried out to equip collective exploration activities. Scientific committee Luis Araujo (Lancaster University), François-Xavier De Vaujany (Université Paris-Dauphine), Maria Elmquist (ChalmersUniversity of Technology), Valérie Fernandez (TELECOM ParisTech), Peter Karnoe (Aalborg University), Christian Licoppe (TELECOM ParisTech), Alexandre Mallard (MINES ParisTech), Yann Ménière (MINES ParisTech), Stefan Meisiek (Copenhagen Business School), Ashveen Peerbaye (Université Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée), Sophie Pène (ENSCI), Julien Pénin (Université de Strasbourg), Cristina Rossi Lamastra (Politecnico di Milano), Benoît Weil (MINES ParisTech) Programme 8h30-9h Participants welcome / coffee 9h-9h15 Welcome (Amphi Estaunié) Yves Poilane, Director, Telecom ParisTech, and Matthieu Glachant, Director, Interdisciplinary Institute on Innovation (i3) 9h15-10h Plenary session (Amphi Estaunié) Charles Baden-Fuller (Cass Business School): “Business models: A challenging agenda” 10h-10h30 Coffee break (Hall Barrault) 10h30-12h30 Thematic parallel sessions (1) Session 1: Users and design (Amphi Estaunié) Session 2: Alternative forms of collective exploration (Room Rubis) Session 3: Managing exploration (Room Jade) 12h30-14h Lunch (Hall Barrault) 14h-14h45 Plenary session (Amphi Estaunié) Bill Gaver (Goldsmiths, University of London): “Polyphony in design” 14h45-15h15 Coffee break (Hall Barrault ) 15h15-17h45 Thematic parallel sessions (2) Session 4: Collective exploration practices (Amphi Estaunié) Session 5: Framing collective exploration (Room Rubis) Session 6: Design: sharing concepts (Room Jade) Session 7: Organizing for collective exploration (Room B603) 17h45-18h Next steps for the I3 community (Amphi Estaunié) 18h Cocktail (Hall Barrault) *** Best regards, Liliana Doganova and Sébastien Gand (Mines ParisTech) Annie Gentès and Laurie Marrauld (Telecom ParisTech) i3conference2013@mines-telecom.fr
For those who may not have seen the decision: Google wins on a straightforward fair use analysis. This outcome is quite significant for digital media and for digital media research. There will almost certainly be an appeal by the Author's Guild, of course. DLB -- 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
I am so, so happy about this. Big win for the Free Culture movement. Link for convenience: http://gigaom.com/2013/11/14/google-wins-book-scanning-case-judge-finds-fair... --- Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt <http://twitter.com/alexleavitt> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Dan L. Burk <dburk@uci.edu> wrote:
For those who may not have seen the decision: Google wins on a straightforward fair use analysis. This outcome is quite significant for digital media and for digital media research.
There will almost certainly be an appeal by the Author's Guild, of course.
DLB
-- 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
_______________________________________________ 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/
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 -- 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
I don't know as I am also a struggling artist in parts of my life it seems a rip off of wages. Then again I haven't looked closely at it.
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:39:59 -0800 From: dburk@uci.edu To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Google Books lawsuit
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
-- 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
_______________________________________________ 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/
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
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
I'll share in the mixed feelings, but add that I too am a bit worried about commercializing access under one corporation that is only 15 years old. What happens to these scans when Google goes out of business or goes bankrupt? Also, If I understand correctly, part of the reason Google has been scanning books is to help develop their semantic search engine and to help Google Translate, both of which require a lot of written language. The scan quality of the books is often too low for preservation, but just good enough for OCR. I'm an advocate of Free Culture too, but Google isn't free (even if its costs are often hidden) and I can't help wondering whether letting Google handle the digitization and distribution of books is really the best we can do? Rex Troumbley, PhD Candidate Department of Political Science University of Hawaii at Manoa On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Dan L. Burk <dburk@uci.edu> wrote:
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
_______________________________________________ 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/
Just to be clear, my happiness is more driven by the fact that there's now one more point in case law to references for future related issues. Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt <http://twitter.com/alexleavitt> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Rex Troumbley <rextroumbley@gmail.com>wrote:
I'll share in the mixed feelings, but add that I too am a bit worried about commercializing access under one corporation that is only 15 years old. What happens to these scans when Google goes out of business or goes bankrupt?
Also, If I understand correctly, part of the reason Google has been scanning books is to help develop their semantic search engine and to help Google Translate, both of which require a lot of written language. The scan quality of the books is often too low for preservation, but just good enough for OCR. I'm an advocate of Free Culture too, but Google isn't free (even if its costs are often hidden) and I can't help wondering whether letting Google handle the digitization and distribution of books is really the best we can do?
Rex Troumbley, PhD Candidate Department of Political Science University of Hawaii at Manoa
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Dan L. Burk <dburk@uci.edu> wrote:
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
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
This does not just affect one corporation. The ruling, and precedent, will benefit HathiTrust too. About HathiTrust: http://www.hathitrust.org/partnership --- C. Sean Burns, PhD | Assistant Professor School of Library and Information Science University of Kentucky 327 Little Library Building | Lexington, KY 40506-0224 Phone +1 859-218-2296 | Fax +1 859-257-4205 https://ci.uky.edu/lis/ http://cseanburns.net/journal/ Alex Leavitt <alexleavitt@gmail.com> wrote: Just to be clear, my happiness is more driven by the fact that there's now one more point in case law to references for future related issues. Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt <http://twitter.com/alexleavitt> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Rex Troumbley <rextroumbley@gmail.com>wrote:
I'll share in the mixed feelings, but add that I too am a bit worried about commercializing access under one corporation that is only 15 years old. What happens to these scans when Google goes out of business or goes bankrupt?
Also, If I understand correctly, part of the reason Google has been scanning books is to help develop their semantic search engine and to help Google Translate, both of which require a lot of written language. The scan quality of the books is often too low for preservation, but just good enough for OCR. I'm an advocate of Free Culture too, but Google isn't free (even if its costs are often hidden) and I can't help wondering whether letting Google handle the digitization and distribution of books is really the best we can do?
Rex Troumbley, PhD Candidate Department of Political Science University of Hawaii at Manoa
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Dan L. Burk <dburk@uci.edu> wrote:
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
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
I think that this is almost unalloyed good news. First, as Alex said, this sets a great precedent for others seeking to digitize and make texts available. There is a ridiculous amount of important work held hostage by copyright. Second, while there is every reason to be wary of trusting Google (or any commercial entity) as the sole owner of this data, let's not ignore the incredible feat of what they have done - they have made millions of books searchable and available, not to mention making much of that data public and usable for others (e.g. https://books.google.com/ngrams). Let's celebrate what is an amazing resource, provided for free, and a court ruling that encourages others to follow suit. Jeremy Foote On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Burns, Christopher S <sean.burns@uky.edu>wrote:
This does not just affect one corporation. The ruling, and precedent, will benefit HathiTrust too.
About HathiTrust: http://www.hathitrust.org/partnership
--- C. Sean Burns, PhD | Assistant Professor School of Library and Information Science University of Kentucky 327 Little Library Building | Lexington, KY 40506-0224 Phone +1 859-218-2296 | Fax +1 859-257-4205 https://ci.uky.edu/lis/ http://cseanburns.net/journal/
Alex Leavitt <alexleavitt@gmail.com> wrote:
Just to be clear, my happiness is more driven by the fact that there's now one more point in case law to references for future related issues.
Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt <http://twitter.com/alexleavitt>
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Rex Troumbley <rextroumbley@gmail.com
wrote:
I'll share in the mixed feelings, but add that I too am a bit worried about commercializing access under one corporation that is only 15 years old. What happens to these scans when Google goes out of business or goes bankrupt?
Also, If I understand correctly, part of the reason Google has been scanning books is to help develop their semantic search engine and to help Google Translate, both of which require a lot of written language. The scan quality of the books is often too low for preservation, but just good enough for OCR. I'm an advocate of Free Culture too, but Google isn't free (even if its costs are often hidden) and I can't help wondering whether letting Google handle the digitization and distribution of books is really the best we can do?
Rex Troumbley, PhD Candidate Department of Political Science University of Hawaii at Manoa
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Dan L. Burk <dburk@uci.edu> wrote:
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
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/ _______________________________________________ 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/
Sorry where was the part about artists making more money? iuniverse made our book of fiction available on google books with out asking us the authors. We make zero dollars from this. I know I am in a sea of academics who want to be read but some of us also want to be paid large fat royalty cheques. Peter
From: jdfoote1@gmail.com Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 22:44:30 -0500 CC: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Google Books lawsuit
I think that this is almost unalloyed good news.
First, as Alex said, this sets a great precedent for others seeking to digitize and make texts available. There is a ridiculous amount of important work held hostage by copyright.
Second, while there is every reason to be wary of trusting Google (or any commercial entity) as the sole owner of this data, let's not ignore the incredible feat of what they have done - they have made millions of books searchable and available, not to mention making much of that data public and usable for others (e.g. https://books.google.com/ngrams). Let's celebrate what is an amazing resource, provided for free, and a court ruling that encourages others to follow suit.
Jeremy Foote
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Burns, Christopher S <sean.burns@uky.edu>wrote:
This does not just affect one corporation. The ruling, and precedent, will benefit HathiTrust too.
About HathiTrust: http://www.hathitrust.org/partnership
--- C. Sean Burns, PhD | Assistant Professor School of Library and Information Science University of Kentucky 327 Little Library Building | Lexington, KY 40506-0224 Phone +1 859-218-2296 | Fax +1 859-257-4205 https://ci.uky.edu/lis/ http://cseanburns.net/journal/
Alex Leavitt <alexleavitt@gmail.com> wrote:
Just to be clear, my happiness is more driven by the fact that there's now one more point in case law to references for future related issues.
Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt <http://twitter.com/alexleavitt>
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Rex Troumbley <rextroumbley@gmail.com
wrote:
I'll share in the mixed feelings, but add that I too am a bit worried about commercializing access under one corporation that is only 15 years old. What happens to these scans when Google goes out of business or goes bankrupt?
Also, If I understand correctly, part of the reason Google has been scanning books is to help develop their semantic search engine and to help Google Translate, both of which require a lot of written language. The scan quality of the books is often too low for preservation, but just good enough for OCR. I'm an advocate of Free Culture too, but Google isn't free (even if its costs are often hidden) and I can't help wondering whether letting Google handle the digitization and distribution of books is really the best we can do?
Rex Troumbley, PhD Candidate Department of Political Science University of Hawaii at Manoa
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Dan L. Burk <dburk@uci.edu> wrote:
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
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/ _______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
That part is here: *Chin also rejected the theory that Google was depriving authors of income, noting that the company does not sell the scans or make whole copies of books available. He concluded, instead, that Google Books served to help readers discover new books and amounted to “new income from authors.”* It's also on p. 12 and p. 26 of the ruling (see PDF linked in the above URL). --- Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt <http://twitter.com/alexleavitt> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Peter Timusk <ptimusk@sympatico.ca> wrote:
Sorry where was the part about artists making more money?
iuniverse made our book of fiction available on google books with out asking us the authors.
We make zero dollars from this.
I know I am in a sea of academics who want to be read but some of us also want to be paid large fat royalty cheques.
Peter
From: jdfoote1@gmail.com Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 22:44:30 -0500 CC: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Google Books lawsuit
I think that this is almost unalloyed good news.
First, as Alex said, this sets a great precedent for others seeking to digitize and make texts available. There is a ridiculous amount of important work held hostage by copyright.
Second, while there is every reason to be wary of trusting Google (or any commercial entity) as the sole owner of this data, let's not ignore the incredible feat of what they have done - they have made millions of books searchable and available, not to mention making much of that data public and usable for others (e.g. https://books.google.com/ngrams). Let's celebrate what is an amazing resource, provided for free, and a court ruling that encourages others to follow suit.
Jeremy Foote
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Burns, Christopher S < sean.burns@uky.edu>wrote:
This does not just affect one corporation. The ruling, and precedent, will benefit HathiTrust too.
About HathiTrust: http://www.hathitrust.org/partnership
--- C. Sean Burns, PhD | Assistant Professor School of Library and Information Science University of Kentucky 327 Little Library Building | Lexington, KY 40506-0224 Phone +1 859-218-2296 | Fax +1 859-257-4205 https://ci.uky.edu/lis/ http://cseanburns.net/journal/
Alex Leavitt <alexleavitt@gmail.com> wrote:
Just to be clear, my happiness is more driven by the fact that there's now one more point in case law to references for future related issues.
Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt <http://twitter.com/alexleavitt>
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Rex Troumbley <rextroumbley@gmail.com
wrote:
I'll share in the mixed feelings, but add that I too am a bit worried about commercializing access under one corporation that is only 15 years old. What happens to these scans when Google goes out of business or goes bankrupt?
Also, If I understand correctly, part of the reason Google has been scanning books is to help develop their semantic search engine and to help Google Translate, both of which require a lot of written language. The scan quality of the books is often too low for preservation, but just good enough for OCR. I'm an advocate of Free Culture too, but Google isn't free (even if its costs are often hidden) and I can't help wondering whether letting Google handle the digitization and distribution of books is really the best we can do?
Rex Troumbley, PhD Candidate Department of Political Science University of Hawaii at Manoa
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Dan L. Burk <dburk@uci.edu> wrote:
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
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/ _______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
participants (8)
-
Alex Leavitt -
Annie Gentes -
Burns, Christopher S -
Dan L. Burk -
Felix Stalder -
Jeremy Foote -
Peter Timusk -
Rex Troumbley