Google Digital Library Attracts Another Lawsuit
Multiple groups representing visual artists are joining forces in a class-action lawsuit against Google for infringing on their copyrights and failing to provide adequate compensation for use of their work in a massive online digital library.
Although Google is already awaiting approval of an existing settlement with the authors and other producers of the books, they are now being faced with a new problem involving the cover art and other visual work.
Google’s new digital library will feature over twelve million books, many of which are currently out of print. The process of scanning books for digital versions obviously raises copyright concerns, but Google surprisingly decided to scan the visual artwork illegally. Now, they are facing a massive lawsuit.
Groups involved in the lawsuit against Google include the American Society of Media Photographers, the Graphic Artists Guild, the North American Nature Photography Association, and the Professional Photographers of America. Many individual artists are also involved.
The groups are accusing Google of large-scale infringements of their copyrights.
If the original $125 million settlement with the authors and other producers is approved, millions of out-of-print books will be published digitally by Google. The visual art world sees this not only as a time to step forward and demand they be rightly compensated by Google for their work, but as a chance to become involved in a new medium through which their work can be experienced.
Google’s move to create a digital library will pay off for them in the long run, but for now, it will only cost them money and effort. The visual artists and the groups representing those artists have taken the appropriate steps in forcing Google to follow the rules, but only time will tell how much they will be compensated for their work.
You bring up another really interesting topic of conversation:
Is it worth it for an artist to allow their work to be consumed for free in order to gain publicity?
I mean, if an artist gives their work away for free and NEVER really “makes it,” it seems like that wouldn’t have been the best plan.
It also brings up the idea that if all of this content is suddenly available, much of it is at risk for being copied and recreated illegally.
I didn’t even think about the copying possibility. But that reminded me that you are right, if the artists are working for free then artists may not have the best possible future!
This is a tough one. Google is providing an online library, thats all. We can all go to the library and take a book, look at, print any pages that we want. This is easy. So all Google is doing is providing this online, making it easier for the consumer. I can understand the authors concerns, but I also think of how much more exposure the authors and photographers are going to get because of Google. Who knows the next Picasso could be discovered because some art expert was looking something up on Google.
I guess I would look at the big picure for this one!