"Summary of principles and recommendations (hyperlinks take you back to the section of the document that discusses them)
- P0: The settlement should be approved
- R0: Approve the settlement.
- P1: The Registry poses an antitrust problem
- R1: Put library and reader representatives on the Registry’s board.
- R2: Require the Registry to sign an antitrust consent decree.
- R3: Give future authors and publishers the same deal as current ones.
- P2 If it didn’t already, Google poses an antitrust problem
- R4: Strike the most-favored-nations clause.
- R5: Allow Google’s competitors to offer the same services the settlement allows Google to offer, with the same obligations.
- R6: Authorize the Registry to negotiate on copyright owners’ behalf with Google’s competitors.
- P3: Enforce reasonable consumer-protection standards
- R7: Prohibit Google from price discriminating in individual book sales.
- R8: Insert strict guarantees of reader privacy.
- R9: Protect readers from being asked to waive their rights as a condition of access.
- P4: Make the public goods generated by the project truly public
- R10: Require that Google’s database of in-print/out-of-print information be made public.
- R11: Require that the Registry’s database of copyright owner information be made public.
- R12: Require the use of standard APIs, open data formats, and (for metadata) unrestricted access.
- P5: Require accountability and transparency
- R13: Require that Google inform the public when it excludes a book for editorial reasons.
- R14: Tighten up the definition of “non-editorial reasons” for excluding a book.
- R15: Allow any institution ready, willing, and able to participate in scanning books to do so."
Monday, January 05, 2009
Analysis of Google Book settlement
James Grimmelmann has done a comprehensive analysis of the proposed settlement agreement in the Google Book case. He concludes with the following recommendations: