• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Google: We will bring books back to life

SFG75 said:
A very arrogant and self-serving proclamation . . .. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Arrogant and self serving? Perhaps some Internet 'tood is feeding back into the real world? :cool:

But closer to topic, I'll offer the slightly perverse thought that most books that have died have deserved their fate and can be forgotten. So, google may be swimming upstream, into the face of an ever increasing information deluge that threatens to drown us all. Who needs yet more obscure, unknown, outdated, old-fashioned, inaccurate, superseded publications hanging around unread?

For example, what is the oldest most obscure and unknown book anyone here has ever wanted to read, and why? :confused:

/the can of worms opens/
 
I for one welcome our Google overlords. More importantly, I welcome their forthcoming tablet.

Peder said:
For example, what is the oldest most obscure and unkknown book anyone here has ever wanted to read, and why? :confused:

/the can of worms opens/
Click to expand...

I want to get a copy of In Tall Cotton by Richard Harwell.

There's a handful of mid 1800's texts I would like to get but are hard to find and expensive when you do.
 
Sparkchaser,Thanks for the reply. It provides food for thought.
The oldest (obscure) books I am looking for probably date from only about the 1950's -- Ernest Becker's The Denial of Death, for example. And one by Karen Horney. And, just for information, there are very few books on my shelves with editions that are older than that either. (It's probably close to the year when I began serious reading and book saving.)
 
Eva said:
I liked this reply comment:
Click to expand...

An excellent point there Eva, that person summed it all up in essence with that tongue in cheek comment. The brave new world here is and we have our internet saviors, please.;)
 
As a librarian, here's the passage in Google's proclamation that I take exception to:

But the remainder of the world's books – indeed the majority – are out of print but in copyright. They are hard for people to find unless they know exactly what they are looking for, and it's very difficult for copyright holders to exploit them commercially. Although copies may be available in libraries, they are effectively dead to the wider world.
Click to expand...

"They are hard for people to find unless they know exactly what they are looking for" -- The catalogs of some of the world's biggest libraries are now searchable online, as are many other finding aids. Or people could just ask a librarian for help. If Google really cares about findability, then they'd be creating a finding aid rather than full-text copies. A finding aid could lead people to sources such as libraries, instead of using legally questionable reproductions of the books themselves.

"it's very difficult for copyright holders to exploit them commercially" -- This is true, but speaking of exploitation, Google is trying to exploit these out-of-print authors rather than help them. If Google really cares about authors, then they could make their huge resources available to serve as an online reprint publisher, with individual contracts with authors, just like a legitimate reprint publisher.

"Although copies may be available in libraries, they are effectively dead to the wider world" -- Excuse me? Libraries go to great lengths to make sure the books in their care aren't "dead to the wider world." Google has lost perspective on what libraries are. It seems to view libraries as tombs that need Howard "Google" Carter to open and bring their treasures to light.
 
Despite heart-rending pleas from librarians and their arguing with Google's salesmanship, my guess is that Google will prevail.
 
This part caught my attention from the article:

The settlement aims to make access to millions of books available either for a fee or for free, supported by advertisements, with the majority of the revenue flowing back to the rights holders. A new not-for-profit registry will be *created to identify the rights holders of lost books and to collect and distribute revenues.

And the rights holders will remain in control. The reality is that they can at any time set pricing and access rights for their works or withdraw them from Google Books altogether.
Click to expand...

Corporations don't usually invest money/research/time into projects that they won't make money off of, and I can't see Google doing this without having monetary expectations to make it worth their while. Ultimately Google will make money off these books.

It seems a little coincidental too that Sony has the ereader available now. Is this Google's way to try to make a profit off their invention?
 
That Google smells the scent of money in reviving books which have long since fallen out of interest is intriguing to me. I wouldn't have thought there was, but I'm far from the expert and I'm curious to see how they do. There will always be people with antiquarian interests, but whether they are enough to provide a market remains to be seen. IM uninformed O of course. :cool:
 
csigirl said:
Corporations don't usually invest money/research/time into projects that they won't make money off of, and I can't see Google doing this without having monetary expectations to make it worth their while. Ultimately Google will make money off these books.
Click to expand...
Of course, just like they make money off search engines, e-mail services, news services, etc. Google's approach has never been to make money by selling information - they provide (or rather provide access to) information for free, and then make money off advertising in connection with it.

It seems a little coincidental too that Sony has the ereader available now. Is this Google's way to try to make a profit off their invention?
Click to expand...
Why Sony's, in particular? There's several other ereaders out there, and AFAIK Google and Sony have no ties (I might be wrong about that). And besides, Sony and other ereader producers won't make any money if there's no content to read on their devices, so it's not like they'll be upset with Google for providing books.
 
That is beyond awesome! You know those book-review cliches about writing so vivid it jumps off the page? Now it's true!
 
The Butcher said:
I don't like reading online,not sure about you guys but I rather have it in my hand than on a screen.
Click to expand...
+1

The tangible feeling of holding a book, flipping through the pages, and purely perusing the text... is magical! I don't care what anybody says.

This Amazon Kindle, Barnes & Noble Nook, whatever, crap that's out can GTFO as well.
 
Checked that Google reads link.I might consider doing it if the book I want is not in my library,though I am having second thoughts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top