Google & Piracy
Over at SF Novelists, author David B. Coe has been talking about the response from Google’s executive chairman, Eric Schmidt, to proposed anti-piracy laws.
“If there is a law that requires DNSs to do X and it’s passed by both houses of congress and signed by the president of the United States and we disagree with it then we would still fight it,” he added. “If it’s a request the answer is we wouldn’t do it, if it’s a discussion we wouldn’t do it.”
Agent Richard Curtis says this is game over, calling it “a staggering and possibly fatal blow” to authors and publishers.
Really? Fatal in the same way that Napster and other file-sharing sites were fatal to the music industry? (Which, as we know, completely ceased to exist on July 13, 2001.)
Coe states unequivocally that piracy hurts an author’s numbers. “Only the most naïve observer could possibly think that piracy doesn’t hurt an author’s prospects for success.”
I guess I’m naïve. Or a “piracy-denier,” to use Coe’s terms. Because I don’t know. I’ve seen data to suggest that sometimes piracy helps overall sales, and I’ve seen other numbers suggesting it hurts. Finding unbiased data is a lot harder. I’ve spoken to individuals who’ve said they pirated one book and went on to legally purchase others. I’ve also seen the “fans” posting to sites asking where they can download the latest release from their favorite author, or boasting about getting an illegal copy of a book on release date.
I’m not saying I support people sharing and downloading my work without paying for it. For the most part, piracy pisses me off.
And my general feeling toward Google is unprintable. This is the company that decided they had the rights to scan and share any out-of-print book that they liked, in blatant violation of copyright law. They’re rallying to “freedom of speech,” but I seem to recall Google merrily censoring their search results for China… “Don’t be evil” my ass.
I don’t believe piracy is hurting me much right now, but I don’t know how that might change in the future. What happens in five or ten years, when a much larger portion of my readers are reading electronically? What happens as my work becomes more popular? (I don’t think it’s a coincidence that I see my German books popping up on pirate sites more frequently than my English work.)
DMCA feels like an endless, generally futile game of whack-a-mole, putting the burden on authors and publishers. Law enforcement, from what I’ve seen, rarely bothers to get involved until you’re talking about massive file-sharing operations, and even then international boundaries make it difficult to do anything about certain sites. We’ve seen from RIAA and the music industry that going after end users is a losing battle. I don’t know what the right answer is here.
I don’t like Google, but I don’t necessarily think that going after search engines instead of going after the file-sharing sites is the best way to go. Where does the responsibility lie? The site hosting the illegal files? (In that case, am I responsible if you post a plagiarized poem in the comments to this blog post?) The individual users who upload them? The search engine who links to them? The author who can’t be bothered to scour the net and send takedown notices?
I don’t have answers, but I think it’s a good conversation to have. I just wish we could have that conversation with more data and facts, and less “end of the world” hyperbole.
Philip Weiss
May 23, 2011 @ 12:13 pm
Google stopped censoring their Chinese search engine in January of 2010. They stated they thought they were doing more good by providing some outside search results even if somewhat censored, but that they no longer felt that was the case. According to what I read on the internet (so it must be true), China now blocks all Google search sites.
Cy
May 23, 2011 @ 4:31 pm
I’m with you on the “piracy-denier” thing–I haven’t seen more than angry knee-jerk reactions to piracy from folks in publishing, in exactly the same way they’ve knee-jerk hated on e-books, the Kindle, and so on. As I own a kindle and have experienced how the ebook-buying/reading works on kindle, I can say with confidence and *first-hand* knowledge, that I like the system, in general. If kindle could get all publishers onboard with their lend-a-book-for-2-weeks capability, it’d be pretty darn perfect.
But about Google and their vile book-scanning ways… If Google wasn’t providing this service, how exactly would one go about finding and reading an out-of-print book? Some of the rare gems they have up there can’t regularly be found on ebay or Amazon marketplace, and as someone who doesn’t know her way around the torrentz well enough to “pirate” said out-of-print book without contracting multiple viruses and trojans, that avenue would be closed to me as well. My local libraries have fairly large collections, but they are FAR from exhaustive.
So given all that, if Google hadn’t used their own time and resources to scan those books, those authors’ words would have been lost in obscurity for however many years it would take some other publisher to give them a reprint–or possibly, lost to history forever. It would be *nice* if Google would go out of their way to set up a system whereby the authors or their estates could earn a few cents every time a Googler surfed in to read their scanned out-of-print book, but I can imagine how much that would slow down the process/make the process even more costly for Google (and after all, they’re still a business). Plus, would consumers even *pay* to read most of these obscure, OOP books?
I think that Google using their own resources to, in a way, “preserve” these books teetering on the edge of obscurity is actually a bit of a public service. Yes, I understand how the individual authors of each of these books would feel outrage to see their work posted online for people to read free of charge, but if we’re being honest here–these books were out of print. In some cases, LONG out of print with really no chance of ever seeing the light of day or the eyes of a fresh reader again. Even if they aren’t making money off these “pirated” scans, as an artist, isn’t it a good thing to have your OOP words live on in the interwebs and maybe find new readers for generations to come? If second-hand immortality was one of an author’s goals when they set their thoughts to paper, Google has basically done for free what many authors might have had to pay online story archives, or personal web servers, etc, to do themselves.
That said, I’m not saying Google’s book-scanning ways are the ultimate solution for giving OOP books a second wind–especially in the case of newer OOP titles by still-read/popular authors who might have gotten a reprint eventually. But in the case of the old, dusty titles that never would have made their authors another scent anyway, I think it’s a pretty nice deal.
Cy
May 23, 2011 @ 4:34 pm
Philip is correct–Google only caved because they didn’t want (well, of course, to lose their access to a quarter of the world’s population, but also because they didn’t want) to leave the people of China–particularly the dissenting factions–to be left without a means to get ANY uncensored information from the outside world. But I guess they didn’t want to taint their name and compromise their company’s ideals any longer by bowing to the Chinese government’s dictates. Thus, baidu rules the interwebs in the Middle Kingdom now~ =__=
Maverynthia
May 23, 2011 @ 8:24 pm
I would hope that if any of the OOP authors DO come back into print that Google would cease distributing the books.
That being said, I’ve actually seen one author that was calling for people TO scan his books because he couldn’t find them online and was missing a copy and wanted to put them back into print himself.
steve davidson
May 24, 2011 @ 5:05 am
“If Google wasn’t providing this service, how exactly would one go about finding and reading an out-of-print book? Some of the rare gems they have up there can’t regularly be found on ebay or Amazon marketplace, and as someone who doesn’t know her way around the torrentz well enough to “pirate” said out-of-print book without contracting multiple viruses and trojans, that avenue would be closed to me as well. My local libraries have fairly large collections, but they are FAR from exhaustive.”
The above kind of encapsulates the root of the problem, which to my mind is the sense of entitlement that seems to go hand in hand with our new internet era.
How does one go about finding an oop? You search. Can’t find it? Go to a well-connected used book store and ask them to search. Or go to the library and avail yourself of inter-library search and lending.
In the long run, you may never get to read that book, if you aren’t into pirating.
Can’t afford to buy it? Wait and save.
But this era is all about immediate gratification, slathered with a heaping of being able to impose your own personal valuation on an object, rather than the seller’s.
The problem is not what is happening now, but the slippery slope it leads to: pushing the perceived value of fiction as a product down.
~~~
It strikes me that one possible way of testing the impact of pirated books is to compare sales of a pirated book vs sales of a similar book for which free excerpts are made available.
It is really tough to compare to ‘similar’ books, but the above might provide some insight by comparing ‘voluntary’ piracy with involuntary piracy.
Jim C. Hines
May 24, 2011 @ 7:54 am
I tend to agree with Steve below. Do you realize that “out of print” includes books only a few years old? Books that authors might be working to find *legal* ways of getting back into print? Google was attempting to blatantly violate copyright law. We’re not talking about old public domain work; we’re talking anything that’s gone out of print, which can happen within a few years of publication.
How exactly would one go about finding an out of print book? Used bookstore. Library. Author putting out e-book editions. Publishers reissuing the book.
*Not* by a major corporation scanning and releasing those books for free, and basically screwing over the author, publisher, and copyright law in the process.
I hope you’re just confusing out of print with out of copyright. I love the idea of scanning public domain works a la Project Gutenberg. But heck, do you know how much short fiction I’ve published in anthologies that are now out of print? I’m working to put those out as e-book collections, but you’re telling me you think Google should be able to scan and release those for free, and the hell with me trying to do anything with those stories?
This is not a knee-jerk reaction. This is me trying to make a living.
Jim C. Hines
May 24, 2011 @ 7:56 am
I would hope that Google would obey the law to begin with.
And sure, an author might ask for help scanning a book and getting an electronic file so that s/he can publish an e-book edition. That’s a totally different thing than Google scanning authors’ books without permission and releasing them all online.
Cy
May 24, 2011 @ 1:07 pm
So you’re saying it would be better for a reader never to be able to read this OOP book they’re interested in if the author decides not to put out an e-book edition, etc. Because I think you’re VASTLY overestimating how able or willing a library or used book store would be to help find obscure OOP books.
It’s not about “instant gratification”–it’s about access, period. Because self-publishing an e-book takes a heck of a lot of work just to get the formatting right, then even more time and expense out of the author’s pocket to promote and many authors are willing to do that. So in your opinion, it would be better for all those books from all those authors to just languish in obscurity?
And while I appreciate how important safeguarding an author or artist’s right to license their own intellectual property is, if a book has been out of print for a decade and publishers printing fewer books every year to survive the soft market, an OOP book from a mid-list author is in all likelihood never going to be printed again—so why *wouldn’t* you want it at least out and available for people to read? The archives at Strange Horizons and other fiction magazines are packed full of free fiction that doesn’t have a home in print, just like the OOP books.
And Jim, yes, I’m talking about the loooooong OOP books here, not the ones that just slipped OOP a few years ago and have a chance of coming back. Which, in my experience at least I have never found on Google books. Kindly point me to one?
Cy
May 24, 2011 @ 1:12 pm
As I mentioned below, I’d be curious to see precisely what kinds of recently-OOP/definitely-has-a-chance-of-coming-back-in-print OOP novels Google is posting for free. I have never found one in my browsing around Google Books, so I can’t quite get on your bandwagon just yet.
And as I said to Steve, I’ve *tried* finding certain OOP novels (on obscure topics, granted), and I’ve never gotten more than a sympathetic, “Sorry” from a librarian and flatly cold disdain from used store clerks if I ask if they have any way to search for these books. So yes, spoiled little Internet-age me has only my evil interwebs to turn to to try to find these books. If no one happens to be selling these books on ebay or Marketplace, I’d be out of luck. And in any case, even if I DID manage to buy these OOP books from ebay, etc, you do realize that the author doesn’t get a single CENT of what I’d pay for the book? So in the end, what’s the ultimate result of having Google remove that scanned OOP book I wanted to read? I wouldn’t get to read the book. And the author STILL wouldn’t get paid.
Jim C. Hines
May 24, 2011 @ 1:16 pm
“And Jim, yes, I’m talking about the loooooong OOP books here, not the ones that just slipped OOP a few years ago and have a chance of coming back. Which, in my experience at least I have never found on Google books.”
Yes, because Google ended up in court over this program. Have you read the Google settlement? It’s nice that you make the subjective distinction between “long” OOP books and “not-as-long” OOP books (ignoring the fact that neither approach is legal if the books are still in copyright). The approach Google took and the settlement they proposed did not make such a distinction.
“And while I appreciate how important safeguarding an author or artist’s right to license their own intellectual property is…”
Based on your comments here, I don’t think you do. I think this bit sums it up:
“…it’s about access, period.”
And your right to access trumps the creator’s rights to control his or her work?
Jim C. Hines
May 24, 2011 @ 1:20 pm
My “bandwagon,” eh?
Goldfish Dreams was on Google’s list of scanned books. That’s *my* novel, published in 2003, which went out of print a few years later.
It’s no longer out there, because Google ended up in court, and I instructed them to take the damn thing down.
And yeah, some out of print books are harder to find than others. A lot take two minutes on Amazon or eBay. Some take longer. So are you saying since you want something and it’s hard work to find it legally, you should be allowed to break the law to get it?
Cy
May 24, 2011 @ 1:54 pm
Wow, Jim, I feel like Public Enemy #1. Thanks. I thought this was a safe forum for examining issues and exploring the various sides of it, but perhaps I was wrong. Anyway, kick me off if you like, but I’m going to keep exploring the topic because I find it interesting, anyway.
So you’re right that I hadn’t been thinking in strictly legal terms–I do forget that that trumps simple things like logic here in the US of A. So then, let’s not make any distinction between books that have been OOP for ages and have zero chance of coming back into print, and more recent OOP books that belong to actively published authors. In that case, I 100% agree that what Google is doing is wrong, because that latter set of books might still have a chance (though in many mid-listers’ cases, an extremely SLIM chance) of coming back into print later. Somehow. Maybe the mid-lister will break out someday and a sudden demand will spring up for his backlist.
But that’s the happy possible success story of the recently-OOP novels. What about the other ones–which, yes, are precisely the same as the example above under the law, and thus will be removed from Google Books in just the same way. But does that benefit the long-OOP books in the same way it did the recently-OOP author?
So let’s pick an example: The current life-of-author + 70 year length of US copyright starts on books published in 1978, so let’s pick a random mid-list book from 1978–a lurid SFF thriller about a planet of ninja amazons, say. It had its few years in print, but went OOP by about 1988 when its author was finally dropped by his agent, who then turned to continue his writing career publishing short stories online in free archives.
Say that I, in 2011, discover his work through these short stories and–seeing in his list of works on his website that he once wrote an entire NOVEL about ninja amazons (which, maybe, is totally my thing)–am filled with a burning desire to read it. Now, where do I turn? First to the bookstores, which of course, don’t carry a book OOP since 1988. Then to the second-hand sellers, both online and brick-and-mortar, which again, no longer carry this trashy paperback from the 70’s. I’m embarrassed to ask my local librarian to help me find said trashy OOP paperback, but eventually work up the nerve to do so–only to be told it’s just not in the database. Can’t find it.
So now… what? The author’s passed on by now and no publisher is ever going to reprint an 4-decade-old (but still in copyright!) novel about ninja amazons from an obscure mid-list author who’s already dead. But maybe I would’ve really loved the book. Maybe, with the evolution of culture and popular taste, a SFF novel about a planet of ninja amazons would’ve been wildly popular today, after my glowing goodreads review got my 500 followers to give it a try, and they in turn would have told others. Maybe it would have become a cult classic and that sad author might have been a rediscovered gem, like Emily Dickenson or Thoreau or even Franz Kafka, who was seen as a complete hack in his lifetime and never sold more than a few unfinished works.
So obviously, the vast majority of the long-OOP-but-still-in-copyright books that Google Books would benefit aren’t going to be genius like that, but those otherwise-gone-from-history words might still connect to a few readers, and as Google will probably be here long after all of us and our personal websites/story archives will be, those scanned stories will last a lot longer in Google Books than it will on library shelves. And if I were a published author, I’d be glad my words wouldn’t be lost.
Cy
May 24, 2011 @ 2:02 pm
So doing the legwork to 2 used bookstores and searching through 2 counties’ library databases is not hard work, huh? Yeah, maybe not. But what else does one do to try to find a used book? Search the jungles of the amazon?
And while I think our legal system is much fairer than others (or endeavors to be, anyway), it is FAR from perfect, and it is our responsibility as sentient, reasoning citizens to continually question and augment (or propose to augment, at least) laws that have become outdated. As I said in my longer reply below, you’re right that all OOP-but-still-in-copyright books are the same under the law. But as I hope my example illustrates, that doesn’t mean the same treatment is what’s best for them.
So instead of playing the semantics game, I’m trying to think about what real-world effect Google’s actions have made for these books. As I said below, in same cases, you’re right–it would hurt the author (as in your case–I’m sorry that happened to Goldfish Dreams. Glad you were able to get it taken down). In others, not so much. Maybe we’ll ultimately just have to agree to disagree.
Jim C. Hines
May 24, 2011 @ 2:03 pm
“Wow, Jim, I feel like Public Enemy #1. Thanks. I thought this was a safe forum for examining issues and exploring the various sides of it, but perhaps I was wrong. Anyway, kick me off if you like, but I’m going to keep exploring the topic because I find it interesting, anyway.”
Public Enemy #1? Really? Wow … your rhetoric is getting a bit over-the-top there.
I do consider this a “safe place” for examining issues, and have worked to keep it so. Has anyone called you names? Threatened you? Told you that your views are stupid? Insulted you in any way?
Safe does not mean nobody’s going to argue with you. It doesn’t mean people aren’t allowed to get angry. If that’s what you’re looking for, then I wish you the best of luck, because I don’t know where you’re going to find it.
It sounds like you’re arguing here that copyright is too long. Great. So campaign to decrease the length of copyright in the U.S. I’ll support you, because I agree with you on that one.
But arguing that copyright is too long and therefore we should just ignore it and let Google do whatever the hell they want is a nonstarter for me. As I said up above, I’ve already watched Google scan and publish one of my works. We’re not talking hypothetical 40-year-old books here; we’re talking a real-world example of Google taking *my* work without permission.
Jim C. Hines
May 24, 2011 @ 2:05 pm
“So doing the legwork to 2 used bookstores and searching through 2 counties’ library databases is not hard work, huh?”
I will mail you one of my books for free if you can show me where in my comment I said that.
Cy
May 24, 2011 @ 2:09 pm
Well, if you can’t take the heat, get of the kitchen, they say. I’m off then. Sorry for all the trouble.
Jim C. Hines
May 24, 2011 @ 2:14 pm
No trouble at all. I don’t mind people arguing or disagreeing with me. I welcome it. (That doesn’t mean I won’t argue back, of course. Especially if it’s something I feels strongly about.)
But if you’re not comfortable, then of course you have every right to leave the conversation.
M. Ogle
May 24, 2011 @ 6:26 pm
Many public and academic libraries participate in Interlibrary Loans, and often for no fee. Even the Library of Congress participates, although you’ll not be allowed to leave your local library with one of their books (on-site access only).
M. Ogle
May 24, 2011 @ 7:00 pm
“I’m embarrassed to ask my local librarian to help me find said trashy OOP paperback, but eventually work up the nerve to do so–only to be told it’s just not in the database. Can’t find it.”
1. I’m sad that you find your librarians intimidating.
2. Unless I think the item particularly interesting, I really don’t pay that much attention to what my patrons are ordering/reading except to note whether we need more items on a subject.
3. A librarian’s job is more than just looking through the catalog to see if we own an item (you can do that fine on your own)… We can check FirstSearch (main US Interlibrary Loan database), online bookstores, online book swaps, book-based social websites, or just give you a longer list of used bookstores to call.
I’m beginning to think public libraries’ inability to remind people of our existence and what we do is implicit in our modern literary quandry.
May 24, 2011 Links and Plugs : Hobbies and Rides
May 25, 2011 @ 1:40 am
[…] Jim C. Hines on Google and Piracy. […]
Amy (LunarG)
May 25, 2011 @ 3:52 pm
What’s your feeling on fan-translations of your works into languages they are not officially translated into? That’s the one kind of piracy I feel fairly certain would actually boost sales and exposure…
Jim C. Hines
May 25, 2011 @ 4:10 pm
Interesting question, and that’s not one I’d thought about. Because my agent works pretty hard to set up licensed editions of my work in other countries, I’m a bit hesitant. But it’s not something I’ve come across, either.
Short answer? I don’t know, and would need to think about it more…
One question – if my work hasn’t been legally translated into a language, how would a fan translation boost sales?