Sunday, July 12, 2009

ALA's Official Position

The ALA offers several very helpful tools for navigating the enormous Google Books settlement and the University of Michigan amendment. Jonathan Band wrote “A Guide for the Perplexed: Libraries and the Google Library Project Settlement,” which offers a succinct description of the settlement with minimal editorializing. Since the passage of the amendment with the University of Michigan, ALA is now offering “A Guide for the Perplexed Part II: The Amended Google-Michigan Agreement.” But these are merely guides to the documents. What is the official ALA stance?

Since the hue and cry seemed to be so great among librarians, publishers and authors, I assumed that ALA would be completely against Google Books and they did recently file a 22 page brief which may be read in its entirety online. However ALA clearly states they are not opposed to the settlement, but rather have concerns similar to mine, but more detailed and couched in better and more legal terms! From the brief: "The Library Associations do not oppose approval of the Settlement. The Settlement has the potential to provide unprecedented public access to a digital library containing millions of books. Thus, the Settlement could advance the core mission of the Library Associations and their members: providing patrons with access to information in all forms, including books." The brief then goes on to enumerate each of the grievances and concerns the association has with the settlement. The six headings are as follows:


II. The Settlement Creates An Essential Facility With Concentrated Control.
III. The Settlement Could Limit Access to the ISD.
IV. The Settlement Will Heighten Inequalities Among Libraries.
V. The Settlement Does Not Protect User Privacy.
VI. The Settlement Could Limit Intellectual Freedom.
VII. The Settlement Could Frustrate the Development of Innovative Services.


The brief outlines six areas of concern and requests court oversight and enforcement. Overall, the brief offers a clear assessment of the both the strengths and potential of Google Books and the possible pitfalls. "The Settlement could compromise fundamental library values such as equity of access to information, patron privacy, and intellectual freedom. In order to mitigate the possible negative effects the Settlement may have on libraries and the public at large, the Library Associations request that this Court vigorously exercise its jurisdiction over the interpretation and implementation of the Settlement. Indeed, in its order approving the Settlement, the Court should make clear that it intends to oversee the Settlement closely."


For more information, see the ALA website.

1 comment:

  1. The settlement, or length of the actual agreement, is a consequence of a complex issue. I do not think a quickfire solution is possible here. I am appreciative of the leg work the ALA does to relate the terms of the settlement to stakeholders. However, speaking of ALA, I wonder what type of resources they have that can be dedicated to police the Google? What sort of political teeth do library organizations have to influence policy makers on a larger scale? I think that if ALA is going to be the only, or one of few, dissenting organizations, it should be well funded to protect the public interest.

    ReplyDelete