The Google Library and Partnership projects: barely covered by the Irish Times

[truthisfree]

can't be arsed truthisfree, you believe the corporate bullying and arbitrary BS of the GBS is justified. l do not, nor does the library of congress, the eu, the US dept of Justice. l know you did not read either thread because you refuse to discuss either The Open Book Alliance or the privacy issue, you ignore the Berne Convention and the intellectual property rights aspects linked in my blog. STOP WASTING MY TIME WITH YOUR BS, familiarise yourself with the issues which are quite vast and write an honest reply.

Dot I have already told you I have been following this for months and have read loads on it.

Well if you couldn't be arsed explaining what this is about Dot, then don't bother, it's your thread!

The library of congress, the eu, the US dept of Justice and of course yourself are already looking after this, you certainly don't need someone like myself to point out that it is about a lot of Corporate Lawyers and self-interested parties/busybodies justifying their positions and using dead authors to justify their shenanigans.

Can you answer what is wrong with archiving and making available all the books that are not in print online, with whatever copyright holders having the ability to have them removed?

I doubt it greatly, but by all means post a few more links rather than debate what this is really about.

[Christine Murray]

l have never stated that there is anything wrong with digitisation or archiving, this thread is about the GBS , which is sourced from multiple media and author discussions. lt is inherently flawed and wholly arbitrary, you have not read it, nor have you used the search engine in my blog.

[truthisfree]

l have never stated that there is anything wrong with digitisation or archiving, this thread is about the GBS , which is sourced from multiple media and author discussions. lt is inherently flawed and wholly arbitrary, you have not read it, nor have you used the search engine in my blog.

You are going around in circles Dot. You have failed to explain succinctly what the problem is.

[Christine Murray]

add to that a complete refusal to look at linked resource pages from Poetry Ireland and a lazy inability to use material herein and on the other P.ie thread to form a conclusion on an ethical approach to digitisation that is *NOT* digested and regurgitated for you Truthisfree, here's a Bloomberg link : U.S. Says Google Settlement ?Raises Concerns,? Needs Changes - Bloomberg.com and a question : Why are Google being sued for multiple breaches of copyright , if they consider that their approach to access, intellectual property rights and consumer data privacy to be both excellent and ethical ?

[Christine Murray]

@Truthisfree you are wholly incapable of reading two threads and their related links to form conclusions independently. You stick to a generalisation of digitisation, without a single reference to the substance and flaws of the GBS.

[Christine Murray]

Google has made comment on the er 'thrust' of the GBS : We at Google will bring books back to life | David Drummond | Comment is free | The Guardian

[Christine Murray]

Judgement is due on the GBS shortly : Ruling due on Google's book plan | Technology | guardian.co.uk
So I thought to put the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Evaluations onto this thread:
Public Policy Connections: EFF Evaluates Google Books Settlement 2.0