Update: Google/libraries/publishers..

This just in from Publishers Lunch:

Google Returns Answers to AAUP Search

Following a flurry of press reports on the letter from AAUP executive director Peter Givler to Google about their Print Publisher and Print Library programs that was posted online by BusinessWeek, Lunch has obtained some clarifications from Google's Tom Turvey.

One issue we reported on Monday was Givler's contention in his letter that he thought he had heard a Google official say at a recent STM publisher meeting that agreeing to participate in Print Publisher was being taken as automatic consent to also allow the display of copyrighted books from the same publisher through the Print Library effort. But Turvey says this is "absolutely not" the case.

Turvey further indicates: "Publishers remain in complete control of which books are displayed on Google, just as web publishers are regarding inclusion of their websites in the index. For any books scanned at libraries, publishers may simply choose not to display these books within Google's index -- no questions asked." He adds that this can be applied title-by-title or to all books from a publisher's list: "Publishers may remove any or all of their books in copyright scanned at libraries from display."

We still don't have a clear read on the circulated, but not confirmed, notion that Google is relying on fair use rights to scan copyrighted books from the collections of academic libraries and display basic matches to search queries even without a publisher's explicit permission. On the service's posted FAQ, they state: "We respect copyright law and the tremendous creative effort authors put into their work. So if we've scanned a library book that's still in copyright, you'll only be able to see a few snippets of text from the book."

To us, this does imply that "snippeting" will occur as a matter of course. But Turvey answers definitively that, regardless of the process under which "snippets" may appear in the Google index, if a publisher requests complete removal, Google will do so.

As for accusations that the service has not honored previous opt-out requests, Turvey replies, "No publisher that has contacted us requesting an opt-out has been denied."

Turvey also comments on another "significant issue in the letter--the idea that Google would assert some kind of tacit copyright ownership of books scanned at libraries or the files from those books. No one at Google has made any statement like this, nor would anyone. Google makes no assertions with regard to copyright for any books it scans, either from libraries or publishers."

And Turvey takes issue with "the notion that Google has not been communicating with publishers." He underscores that the company has met with numerous industry organizations, and worked with publishers' queries "frequently and repeatedly"--including presentations "to some of AAUP's most prominent members more than once, and we have taken and answered their questions during those meetings." He indicates, "We've met personally with Peter Givler more than once. Candidly, we were surprised by the assertion that we haven't been responsive or answered questions."
Wrap...