Publishers Fight Back Against Google with New Book Search Service
Publisher HarperCollins and Austin, Texas-based LibreDigital announced today a hosted service called LibreDigital Warehouse that will give publishers and booksellers the ability to deliver searchable book content on their own Web sites. Like Google Book Search, the service will allow users to search the entire content of a book and preview a percentage of its text and illustrations. Unlike Google, LibreDigital Warehouse allows publishers to The service is the first to allow publishers to digitally capture and deliver book content in a controlled context online, according to LibreDigital. "This solves publishers' issue of being able to assert their copyright on content on the Internet while still being able to offer all the features that the Internet allows," said Craig A. Miller, general manager of LibreDigital. Google, for its part, maintains that it respects publisher copyright. Google Book Search, still in beta, reveals "snippets" of text when a user searches for books. If a book is not under copyright, Google allows users to view the entire book. Google declined to comment for this article. LibreDigital Warehouse will offer 160 to 200 HarperCollins titles initially. HarperCollins plans for the database to eventually include up to 10,000 titles. HarperCollins is currently the only participating publisher, but the program has received a "warm welcome" from other publishers who are also interested in participating, according to LibreDigital. LibreDigital is a division of Newstand, which provides exact digital duplicates (layout included) of newspapers such as the New York Times and USA Today. Miller says that Newstand, in business since 1999, has more experience with book scanning and digital rights management, and their process is superior to Google's. High-quality scans are important to publishers, Miller says, because they want to replicate the experience of browsing a book as closely as possible. "While we haven't surveyed users of the book product yet," said Miller, "on the newspaper side we have seen a really high desire for that layout to be exactly duplicated online, a desire for that analogous experience. And obviously, publishers are concerned about copyright issues." Patricia Schroeder, president of the Association of American Publishers, said LibreDigital Warehouse would be a way to help authors, distributors and independent booksellers market their titles, while allowing publishers to maintain presentation quality and copyright control. "Publishers, unlike the popular portrayal of them, have been digitizing their content for a very long time," said Schroeder. "They're very much ready for this. Obviously, they're very happy to work with people and with search engines that respect their copyright."
Google is also being sued by the Author's Guild for infringing on copyrights with Google Book Search Library Project. Susan Wojcicki, vice president of product management at Google, responded to the Author's Guild suit in a blog posting last year. David Drummond, general counsel and vice president of corporate development, defended Google Print Library in a similar posting. "Nobody in any information business wants to wind up in a world where Google is the sole intermediary," said Jupiter analyst Barry Parr. "But [LibreDigital Warehouse] is about more than just Google. Publishers still have this core problem that there aren't a lot of outlets and a handful of big retailers make up a huge percentage of their volume. Marketing and distribution is a big way publishers try to add volume and control their destinies." HarperCollins announced a version of LibreDigital Warehouse, called "Browse Inside," on its own Web site earlier this month, although users can only browse predefined pages instead of searching. |
Comments (12)
I think that Google with its clout and reach will become such a powerful marketing source that publishers will feel that they have to join it.
Posted by Andy | August 22, 2006 2:50 PM
Maybe, but I'd wait until the AAP and AG lawsuits against Google are settled to determine that. And I do think they'll be settled, not decided.
Posted by Steve Bryant | August 22, 2006 3:02 PM
This may not be a good thing. IANAL, but I would think this could affect Google's fair use defense.
Posted by Charlie Lowe | August 22, 2006 5:05 PM
You are incorrect in saying that limiting user access to books is unique to this new offering. Google has a variety of ways of limiting user access. First, I've seen several examples of sections deemed off limits. There are also page view limits that are enforced with a mandatory login. Refer to these pages: Percentage limitations: https://books.google.com/support/partner/bin/answer.py?answer=17893 Restricted pages mentioned: https://books.google.com/support/partner/bin/answer.py?answer=38121
Posted by Will | August 22, 2006 8:34 PM
Thanks for catching my mistake, Will. I'll post a correction in the article.
Posted by Steve Bryant | August 23, 2006 8:38 AM
For some reason, media coverage on this issue usually does not focus on the key point at issue from the publisher's point of view, which is this: Google makes a copy of the whole book, and they do so without anyone's permission. Then then proceed to make money off that copy. The rightful owner of the book doesn't get any of that money. Google's contention that they're being good because publishers can opt out of their program is like me borrowing your car without your permission and then claiming that it's OK for me to do that because I won't do it again if you complain. In most jurisdictions, that will get me in jail for grand theft auto--but then again, I'm not Google. Google's contention that they're not being evil because they don't display the whole book at one time really shows how stupid they think we all are. They think we'll not notice that over time, and to many users, they not only display the whole book, but do so many times, and get substantial income off it, without recompense to the rightful owner of the property they have used.
Posted by Robert Bethune | August 23, 2006 1:09 PM
With all due respect, I'm not sure what's so new about LibreDigital. ebrary (http://www.ebrary.com) has been doing this for six years. They take a simple PDF from the publisher (that is on its way to the print shop anyway) and deliver it to the browser with the exact look and feel as the printed content, and with solid DRM. The only thing ebrary doesn't do is the scanning part, for which they recommend a partner -- Kirtas -- but any customer/publisher who provides them with scanned OCR+corrected text can get their content + metadata onto ebrary's platform pronto. So what's so revolutionary or innovative here? Seems LibreDigital is a bit full of themselves.
Posted by Buddy Kumar | August 23, 2006 4:15 PM
Might I add, Mr. Bryant, you ought to go out and take a look at the broader ebook/econtent market because besides ebrary (which probably has the best technology), there are numerous other players who do this better than Google and have been for quite some time. LibreDigital is simply the new kid on the block, touting its wares as if no one had ever done this before. Which rock have they been hiding under? Nonetheless, this is a good discussion. Thanks.
Posted by Buddy Kumar | August 23, 2006 4:27 PM
Thanks for the info, Buddy. I'll be the first to admit I'm no expert on online book technology. However, I do know that publishers have been digitizing books for upwards of ten years, ever since the e-book was a popular buzzword. This article is newsworthy, IMHO, because 1) it demonstrates that publishers aren't complete luddites; and 2) that HarperCollins -- one of the companies suing Google through the AAP -- is trying to take control of their online publishing destiny.
Posted by Steve Bryant | August 24, 2006 9:35 AM
Mr. Bethune, I think your view of Google is unfairly cynicaly and uninformed. Google cooperates with libraries and makes their holdings (which are publicly accessible) searchable. Would it be wise to limit those who can find books in a library to those who can walk through its doors? When people are connected to books that contain information they're interested in, Google offers them an opportunity to buy these books. They publishers take their cut, the author next, the vendor, third, and it's doubtful Google makes anything at all (as of now). I've looked at the links and Google links you straight to an ISBN query.
Posted by Will | August 25, 2006 12:30 AM
The problem is that Google is building a community of users around this search. They display sponsored links and generate revenue around these publishers content...this is all done without permission. There is a consortium of premium content publishers called congoo - http://www.congoo.com I wonder if Google will switch their model and begin sharing revenue with publishers? This seems to be a better way where everyone agrees, cooperates and wins.
Posted by William Royer | September 2, 2006 10:56 AM
Several publishers are speaking up to say that Google Book Search has actually helped increase book sales.Despite...
Posted by Google Watch | October 6, 2006 3:16 PM