I'm serious. I've read eleventy-hundred articles about it, and I still don't get a) what Google is trying to do, b) why others don't want Google to do it, and c) what's an "orphan work"?
I'm plenty smart, but I just can't wrap my head around this thing. I know there are a mazillion intelligent, articulate people on OS, and one of you might clear it up for me. Please use small words, short sentences, not too many sentences in your pargraphs and MAYBE I'll be able to understand it.
I thank you in advance for any assistance you might provide.
There's nothing worse than being smart enough to know you're just plain dumb! Sheesh.


Salon.com
Comments
"As proposed, the settlement of the case filed by the Authors Guild and the American Association of Publishers in 2005, revolves around Google's ability to include content from books online, and in particular 'orphan' works that are still under copyright, but are out of print or written by authors who can't be found. "
"But some parties to the deal are objecting to Google's proposed settlement. "
There's a jumplink in that last sentence, but of curse, I don't know how to put it in. Here's the page:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10229372-93.html
[sidenote: I used to work with Judge Denny Chin. He's a reasonable, fair and balanced judge.]
Connie, that helped some. I guess what this means is that Google wants to put all books online for us to have at? That's kind of cool and not so cool, I guess. Hey, super glad you're avatar is back.
I don't really know---but I figure that's a pretty good guess.. .
Basically Google wanted to scan every known book on the planet for their data base without asking the authors and copyright holders their permission.
I've known about this for several years and I did not agree with Google's "mission."
To me it's just another form of artistic rights being manhandled like apples at some cheap grocery store.
Well, there you go! Luis, with your help I think I finally understand this. Thanks.
In part, their idea is noble, but in part, it's skeevy, as it doesn't acknowledge the writer and/or pay that writer. And then the work is out there, FREE, and who buys a book after it's on the Internet for free? So, the writer loses out on his/her money for his/her work forever after that. It's actually is very wrong. Think how Dave Cullen would feel, after all his backbreaking work and research, if Google printed his book without his permission, paid him a small fee and then that was it. His print sales would fall into the abyss.
Google needs to be broken up. They are too big.
Well, that's the main stuff. I'm probably getting a bit of it wrong.