Comments on: Google Book Search and Reader Privacy: A Consideration and Call to Action

By: Do we need a “reader’s rights registry”? « Everybody’s Libraries

Tue, 05 May 2009 20:18:38 +0000

[…] to fulfill their independent missions. They may also pay insufficient attention to concerns like privacy or intellectual freedom that are important for many of our […]

By: Google Book Search: What Is Plan B? | Booksquare

Google Book Search: What Is Plan B? | Booksquare — Tue, 05 May 2009 19:16:26 +0000

[…] know the issues surrounding the first. The second item includes readers (see last week’s item about privacy), librarians, other search companies, non-US publishing professionals, publishers who aren’t […]

By: ???? ???» ?????????

???? ???» ????????? — Sun, 03 May 2009 09:28:35 +0000

[…] ????, ?????? ????? ????, ??????? ????? Booksquare, ??? ??????? ?????????? ?? ?????? ???????. […]

By: Peter Jurmu

Peter Jurmu — Fri, 01 May 2009 21:13:59 +0000

There was a third alternative, Perry, at least as far as the AG and AAP (who together comprise the ‘They’ in this situation) are concerned. You can’t stop an idea as great as Book Search, and I mean ‘great’ as much in terms of its momentum as its quality (thanks to Google’s size and clout), but They could have not presumed to speak for every living author and reader. And, if They had to do that for the sake of bargaining power, then perhaps They could have reached a deal that addresses these and other concerns, which are neither unreasonable nor obscure.

I have difficulty believing, however, that They or Google are necessarily conniving to steal information or track hapless readers. These provisions and protections that organizations like the EFF want included in the settlement ought to have been included from the start–and They ought to have insisted on them as parts a list of preconditions–not as countermeasures but as safeguards against the uglier parts of human nature that can be exercised through one large entity controlling such an amount of cultural capital.

By: Charles Jacobs

Charles Jacobs — Fri, 01 May 2009 20:34:13 +0000

Congratulations on pointing out a concern that frankly whizzed right by me, just as it slipped by so many others. Reader privacy is a crucially important issue. We can’t suffer a “literary version” of the Patriot Act. Many of us hoped that personal surveillance without warrants disappeared along with George Bush. While the Google program is a far cry from the surveillance activities in the Bush regime, I worry over any random incursion into the personal lives of U.S. citizens that have not first been approved by the court. You can add my name to the list of objectors to the Google program until this problem is resolved.

By: Charles Jacobs

Charles Jacobs — Fri, 01 May 2009 20:34:13 +0000

By: Perry Brass

Perry Brass — Fri, 01 May 2009 18:17:42 +0000

Google Book Search is a huge goldmine for Google (wonderful how the two words mix well with each other). They have access to millions of pages of content on which to place ads, that will never be compensated to the content providers. This would be like the NY Times offering writers compensation only when readers clip out coupons on their pages and send them in: that is the way publisher compensation works for Book Search. I have 11 books in this program. They have generated thousands and thousands of pages of “view,” and I have been compensated nada. Nothing. The alternative though, for publishers, is even a rawer deal: to be left out of the most powerful search engine in the world. So something needs to be done to Google Book Search to keep the entire writing and publishing world from getting the shaft, slowly.

Perry Brass, author of Carnal Sacraments, A Historical Novel of the Future, and other books.

By: Richard Hargis

Richard Hargis — Fri, 01 May 2009 17:59:06 +0000

Whereas privacy is important for readers, authors/publishers, as I understand it are to be paid by GBS for “clicks” on their ads. I would question the reason for tracking page reads: if it’s for reasons other that paid clicks or reads, which Google does not disclose a dollar amount, then the activity begs a serious question as to the invasion of privacy. Too many restrictions applied to GBS may prove tantamount to shooting ourselves in the foot.

By: Google Book Settlement Link Dump Awesomeness at pureinformation.org

Google Book Settlement Link Dump Awesomeness at pureinformation.org — Fri, 01 May 2009 14:48:26 +0000

[…] Booksquare: Google Book Search and Reader Privacy: A Consideration and Call to Action […]

By: Musematic » Reading, Privacy, and the Google Book Settlement

Musematic » Reading, Privacy, and the Google Book Settlement — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:49:15 +0000

[…] An excellent article by Kassia Kroszer on Booksquare nicely sums it all up (saving me a heck of a lot of time); here’s just one excerpt: “If the settlement is approved, then Google owns lots and lots of readers. We’re locked into the Google service if we want the best possible search results. Yet our concerns were not addressed in the settlement. One such worry is the privacy factor.” […]