State of Connecticut objects to Google Book settlement; so do Software Freedom Law Center and the EFF

By Paul Biba

One the the unusual objectors to the settlement is the State of Connecitut. Rather than burden you with a lot of blockquotes, all the text below comes from the organization’s public statements.

“the treatment of unclaimed funds proposed in the Settlement Agreement would violate state unclaimed property laws by misappropriating unclaimed funds for the maintenance of the Book Rights Registry…and to reimburse authors and publishers by ‘topping up’ their payments under the distribution plan.” And it says that states in general (and therefore their universities, which is a key part of the settlement from the publishers’ perspective) cannot be bound by the agreement: “Connecticut, and every state, is protected by the Eleventh Amendment and the doctrine of sovereign immunity, and cannot be swept into this litigation or its proposed resolution by settlement except by express consent.”

Now that one is going to cause the judge to have is law clerks do a bit of research!

Thanks to the Publishers Lunch email briefing for the tip.

———————-

Today SFLC filed a letter with the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York objecting to the Google Book Search Copyright Class Action Settlement. In the letter, filed on behalf of the FSF and author Karl Fogel, SFLC asks the court to consider the impact of the settlement upon members of the class who have distributed their works under Free licenses.

While the FSF objects to the settlement on other grounds, this letter highlights how the proposed settlement does not contemplate works distributed under the GNU Free Documentation License (the FDL) or the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license (the CC-BY-SA). If the Settlement is approved, Google will be authorized to continue to digitize, sell and partially display books without complying with the “copyleft” and “share alike” license terms which are which are essential to the freedom granted by these licenses.

The letter urges the Court to reject the proposed settlement until these and other objections are addressed, including that terms are incorporated to protect the authors of freely licensed works and a framework is provided for the Book Rights Registry that respects the choice of authors to share their works. The full text of the letter is available here (pdf).

Thanks to Ian Sullivan for this.

——————————–

A coalition of authors and publishers—including best-sellers Michael Chabon, Jonathan Lethem, and technical author Bruce Schneier—is urging a federal judge to reject the proposed settlement in a lawsuit over Google Book Search, arguing that the sweeping agreement to digitize millions of books ignores critical privacy rights for readers and writers.

The group of more than two dozen authors and publishers, represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the Samuelson Law, Technology, and Public Policy Clinic at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law (Samuelson clinic), filed an objection to the settlement today. The coalition is concerned that Google’s collection of personal identifying information about users who browse, read, and make purchases online at Google Book Search will chill their readership.

“Google Book Search and other digital book projects will redefine the way people read and research,” said Lethem, winner of a National Book Critics Circle Award. “Now is the moment to make sure that Google Book Search is as private as the world of physical books. If future readers know that they are leaving a digital trail for others to follow, they may shy away from important intellectual journeys.”

The settlement, currently pending approval from a New York federal district court, would end the legal challenges brought by the Authors’ Guild over the Google Book Search project. It would give Google the green light to scan and digitize millions of books and allow users to search for and read those books online. However, Google’s system could monitor what books users search for, how much of the books they read, and how long they spend on various pages. Google could then combine information about readers’ habits and interests with additional information it collects from other Google services, creating a massive “digital dossier” that would be vulnerable to fishing expeditions by law enforcement or civil litigants.

“I believe that the fear of tracking will create a chilling effect on my readers and reduce my readership, and therefore my revenue, from these books,” said Schneier, a computer security expert. “Moreover, I write these books in order to participate in the public debate on security issues. Reduced readership negatively impacts my expressive interests as an author.”

In the objection filed today, the coalition asks the court to require Google to create a robust privacy policy that gives readers as much privacy in online books as they have in a library or a bookstore and to ensure that the policy is enforceable and overseen by the court on an ongoing basis. The authors and publishers present a list of privacy protections that would improve the settlement, including limiting tracking of users by requiring a court order or judge-approved warrant before disclosure of the information collected, ensuring user control of personal information stored by Google, and making the system transparent to readers. After much pressure from EFF, ACLU, the Samuelson clinic, and others, Google finally issued a privacy policy for Google Books on September 3, 2009. However, that policy doesn’t guarantee that Google will require court approval before disclosing reader information, and it doesn’t sufficiently limit Google’s retention of that information. It is also changeable by Google at any time.

Thanks to ResourceShelf for the link.