Will Google Print be the death of writers everywhere?
written by Julie R. Neidlinger 3 comments link this post
You can bet publishers are well aware of Google Print, just unveiled three days ago. Publisher's and the publishing industry have been up in arms (and lawsuits) over Google's scanning documents and books from participating libraries.
The standard song the publishing industry has been singing is that not only will it hurt them, but it will hurt the authors and creators of books now and in the future.
But will it?
For a different take on both the possible effects on writers and the publishing industry, as well as a few pointed thoughts on the publishing industry in general, have I got the blog for you to visit: Raving Lunacy.
Check out these posts:
Definitely some unique thoughts to consider, of which I admit I had not. To be honest, I hadn't given Google Print much thought because 1) I know that I'll find it fun to mess around with, and 2) I'm not a "published" author in that I don't have a publisher. I'm just one of those self-published writers because either I'm not lucky enough to get a publisher or I secretly don't trust any publisher and can't commit to any contract. You decide. But do read the posts first.
Labels: writing
Copyright (c) Julie R. Neidlinger 11/07/2005 12:05:00 AM
SHARE THIS POST: Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine
Like this post? Subscribe to the feed.
Click here to help support this site.
3 Comments:
I'm all for giving away free samples and related content. I think the "try a bite" approach works wonders for garnering interest, generating goodwill, and spurring sales.
But I absolutely do not want the complete text of my books available online for free. Why would anyone buy a book they could scan, search, or print out from the web? And why should Google be able to swoop down and make money off of other people's work, simply because they've figured out how to scan books?
More importantly, what's with the guy you're referring to in your posts? He seems to think that "society" should ultimately own all intellectual property, because society "allows" some individuals to express themselves? Scary stuff, Julie. Scary stuff. Personally, I grew up believing that our right to self-expression comes straight from our creator, not our community. If your guy gets his way, who's going to settle disputes and make decisions on behalf of "society" -- a Google employee? A government bureaucrat?
No, I'll take my chances with copyright law and the free market any day. And unlike your source, I'll assume that any writer who can sign a publishing contract is probably able to read English and work out his or her own deal with free-market publishers.
Oh, and the 14-year copyright idea? The guy seems to feel that he's being generous in graciously permitting writers to sell their work for a whole 14 years. I wonder how he'd feel if the government emptied his savings account every 14 years, or wiped out his IRA and pension every 14 years, or took his home from him every 14 years. After all, if you follow his line of thinking, it's the government that makes it possible for him to live, work, and earn money in the first place: starting from scratch every 14 years would just be a fair way to ensure that he repays his debt to society.
By 
Corrine, at
November 07, 2005 12:24 PM
I'm not sure I agree with his concept that because society "allows" us to create they should get a nice chunk since I don't think society really does much to help us out in terms of distraction and what it takes to be one of those "functioning" members of society.
But his statements on publishers, who benefits the most from contracts and that line of thinking is intriguing.
I don't think the 14 year copyright idea is quite the equivalent of emptying out a bank account every 14 years. Interestingly enough, the concept of debt forgiveness every seven years (an idea that could in a sense wipe out the chance to bring in money for people who own the debts) is a biblical one. Now, I'm not trying to shove the Bible down anyone's throat, but I've always found that concept a tough one to wrap my mind around, this giving up of a chance to profit after only seven years, and wondered what would really happen if it was done. Consequently, I wonder what would really happen if copyrights ended in 14 years.
To be honest, I'm not really opposed to it, and I am both a writer (albeit small-time), musician (again, very small-time) and artist (maybe not so small). It would affect me greatly.
I have seen (a particular artist I knew eight years ago in mind) zealous copyright protection turn an artist into a basket case, spending too much time, thought and even money chasing after people who may or may not have infringed on her copyrighted work. I know that after five years, I'm ready to sell old work cheap, get it out, and move on because guarding and protecting it prevents me from moving on. I wonder if letting copyrights expire after 14 years would force more creators to create instead of living off of one baby for eternity.
Granted, there's always going to be the creator (and I know I'd be one) who didn't make a cash cow out of something in 14 years, after which some business-minded person will profit greatly because they, while not having the gift of creation, have the gift of marketing or making money. Not fair. So yes, that's a possibility. But I also think how crippling copyright laws can prevent some creation that is based on earlier work from coming into being, with the people benefitting from the copyright being publishers and big movie studios, and not the creators. I read the author of those blog posts as thinking along those lines and so wasn't upset with his take on the matter.
By Julie, at
November 07, 2005 1:13 PM
I think it is OK. I mean amazon does it. If you can view a few pages to see if the book interests you enough to buy it, I think it is OK. I don't know how I'd feel if MY book were there, but like I said, if it was the determining factor for someone to buy my book, I'd probably not mind.
By busy91, at
November 08, 2005 12:55 PM
