No Results Found

Rumor had it that the seven-minute walk from the Charles to Widener was soon to be instantaneous, as Google launched its bold book-scanning project. Seen by many as a noble, if dauntingly large venture, the project promised to provide accessibility and protection for the world’s literature in digital form. Unfortunately, over 300 publishing companies did not agree; and their opposition found legal sanction in a 125 million dollar settlement, halting the scanning of material still under copyright. Harvard University, which has been cooperating with Google and four other libraries, decided to extract itself from the project as legal liabilities mounted. Going forward, the University will only allow Google to scan works that are no longer protected by copyright. While the protection of intellectual property would seem a compelling reason to stop Google, we feel that publishing companies need to be less obstructionist and more proactive in digitizing their material.

Harvard University’s withdrawal is unfortunate but both understandable and expected. That said, as legal pressure from publishers continues to grow, Harvard can and should find other ways—beyond just allowing the scanning of books no longer subject to copyright laws—to aid Google’s digitization project. For example, Harvard should explore the possibility of allowing books that are published through its own publishing house to be scanned. Many important works, such as the Loeb Classical Library series, could be made available to Google in this way. We feel that Harvard should continue to offer its support in this endeavor and lead the industry in proactive measures.

Less praiseworthy has been the publishing industry’s response to the Google endeavor. It is no surprise that as the world digitalizes, the book will follow to one degree or another, and publishing companies are well aware of this. By choosing to fight the inevitable, publishing houses are merely hurting themselves. Rather than pour time and money into fruitless legal battles, they would do well to embrace what Google has tried to start; and in so doing, they could control the project’s development and implementation on their own terms.

What makes the conflict all the more tragic, and avoidable, is that there is a road map for this problem. The publishing industry has only to look to their cousin, the music industry. Despite incessant threats, countless legal battles, and millions of dollars spent, music is still digitalizing—if not legally, then illegally. Such industries must recognize the choices before them: They can either choose to benefit from advances by taking progressive stances or to suffer from obstinacy and inaction.

Though fear of change in an old industry is understandable, obstructionism is inexcusable. Whether it is Google scanning great works in Widener to preserve them for posterity, or an avid fan merely typing out a newly released Harry Potter book, digitalization is coming to the printed world. We can only hope that publishers soon see the merits in supporting, not hindering, the advance of this process.