Federal court to review claims against Google book deal

Google has been digitizing the works from many major libraries in the United States, but in 2005 the search giant came under scanner. The Authors Guild, representing 8000 authors, filed a suit against Google alleging copyright infringement.

The parties reached settlement last October according to which Google was given the right to digitize books that are still in copyright protection but out of print.

The $125 proposed settlement, which led to dozens of filings opposing the deal as anti-competitive, is awaiting review by New York District Court Judge Denny Chin.

“The number and quality of opposition filings is very unusual,” said Jay Tidmarsh, a professor of law at Notre Dame Law School. “The court is going to have to look at the public interest in the settlement.”

Currently, the Department of Justice is investigating the deal for any possible infringement of the Sherman Act, an anti-trust law and it can make its views known to the court by Sept. 18. The hearing on the proposed book settlement is scheduled for Oct. 7.

Book deal lambasted as anti-competitive
A number of organizations have raised concerns on whether the settlement is fair to authors, whether it violates privacy of people as their reading habits might be tracked, and whether the search giant will gain monopoly by having the exclusive right to digitize millions of out of print books.

In a 32 page brief, Silicon Valley attorney Gary Reback, has raised concerns on behalf of the Open Book Alliance, representing Microsoft, Amazon, Yahoo, library associations, nonprofit organizations and individuals, saying that Google has conspired with publishers to prevent other contenders from digitizing books.

“The publishing industry desperately wants to raise the retail price point for digital books," Reback wrote for the alliance. "The book settlement permits them to achieve that by working with Google."

In a separate filing, Microsoft argued, "A class action settlement is the wrong mechanism, this court is the wrong venue, and monopolization is the wrong means to carry out the worthy goal of digitizing and increasing the accessibility of books."

Antitrust concerns unfounded, say the deal defenders
The defenders of the deal, which included 32 professors specializing in antitrust and economics law, claimed that anti-trust concerns are unfounded.

Instead they believe that Google book deal will redefine the way people read and search by making millions of hard-to-find books accessible to anyone through Internet.

“We have never said that the same kinds of outcomes would not be available to Microsoft or Amazon or anyone else who is willing to make the same investments,” said Richard Sarnoff, former chairman of the Association of American Publishers and co-chairman of the American unit of Bertelsmann, the parent company of Random House. “We have a road map to do it now.”