Ethical Assessment of Google's Book Settlement Venture

It would be very contrasting to oppose the 'Google's Book Digitizing Scheme 'because we can't imagine our lives without the digitized books that can be accessed easily whenever we want. The vast pool of knowledge that can be found just on one click is only possible due to the initiatives taken by Google in its plan of making "Digital Library" .It has helped millions of people to get free access to lots of books thus giving a source of knowledge without which it could have been a part of dream to get those expensive books .But if we see the through the ethical point of view , though it was a kind of fair use but it was an example of copyright violation where the electronic rights of the copyright holders were being infringed and the Google was gaining commercial value with the help of "snippets" and increased number of visitors to its websites but the actual copyright holders of the works were not getting any economic returns. According to the Copyright Law,"The owner of copyright in a protected work may use the work as he/she wishes, and may prevent others from using it without his authorization."

The authors have the legal rights to file charges against ' Google's Book Scanning Program ' as it was an example of publication of their copyrighted works without their consent.

As a result of filing class action copyright infringement complaints by authors and publishers in 2005,it led to a settlement between the two parties establishing an agreement- "The Google Books Settlement: A Private Contract in the Absence of Adequate Copyright Law".According to the Settlement Google got the license to use ,sell online millions of books published before January 5,2009. Googles goal of digitizing up to 20 million books drawn from participating libraries have made the scenario matter of concern for the copyright holders. With one legal document, Google, the Authors Guild, and the Association of American Publishers have made a deal that could transform the digital marketplace for books and could give Google a legal and exclusive rights to use the books for its digital library .The formation of new agency, the Book Rights Registry (BRR) act as a medium between Google and the millions of rights-holders who hold a U.S. copyright interest in any work published on or before January 5, 2009.Through this organization it was possible to have a control on Google's Scheme of digitization of Books and to have its records. There were many shortcomings in the first agreement as there was inequality between U.S. and non-US citizens. Apart from these , also the orphan's works revenues were distributed among the known right-holders which created a monopoly of the known right-holders and the recognition of the unknown writers remain un-noticed.The settlement creates a situation where the right-holders were getting economic benefits(63%) of the earned revenues.To respond to the drawbacks of the Settlement , amendments were made through which the task of locating the authors of orphan works was made compulsory but still a huge numbers of authors of orphan works remained unnoticed. Thus the right-holders registered to the BRR were enjoying the economic returns of their works but not all sections of the writers could have enjoyed this right. Further the non US citizens were treated differently.Thus the Settlement has created a situation of monopoly of influential writers, unequal treatment of writers. The most important thing was that it was a private agreement where the practice of class demarcations was practiced. The agreement has made two classes i.e. Author Sub Class and Publisher Sub Class which are accepted on ethical ground as everybody were not being treated equally. On ethical point of view many areas are still violating copyright laws but the advantages of the public due to this huge digitized library has supported the agreement without which perhaps it would not have been possible for us to have an access to the large collection of books which is the result of 'Google's Book Settlement Venture'.