The proposed settlement in the Google Book Search case should be approved with strings attached. The project will be immensely good for society, and the proposed deal is a fair one for Google, for authors, and for publishers. The public interest demands, however, that the settlement be modiﬁed ﬁrst. It creates two new entities - the Books Rights Registry Leviathan and the Google Book Search Behemoth - with dangerously concentrated power over the publishing industry. Left unchecked, they could trample on consumers in any number of ways. We the public have a right to demand that those entities be subject to healthy, pro-competitive oversight, and so we should.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Searching for Health: The Topography of the First Page. [REVIEW]Jill McTavish, Roma Harris & Nadine Wathen - 2011 - Ethics and Information Technology 13 (3):227-240.
Empiricism, Pragmatism, and the Settlement Movement.Tom Burke - 2010 - The Pluralist 5 (3):73-88.
Google Embryo for Building Quantitative Understanding of an Embryo As It Builds Itself. I. Lessons From Ganymede and Google Earth.Richard Gordon - 2009 - Biological Theory 4 (4):390-395.
Artscience: Creativity in the Post-Google Generation.David A. Edwards - 2008 - Harvard University Press.
Ethical Debate Over Organ Donation in the Context of Brain Death.Mary Jiang Bresnahan & Kevin Mahler - 2010 - Bioethics 24 (2):54-60.
Added to index2009-04-23
Total downloads3 ( #700,438 of 2,171,803 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #326,702 of 2,171,803 )
How can I increase my downloads?