- Atheists sue to remove ‘Ground Zero Cross’ from 9/11 museum
- Bishop in Aleppo: ‘We Christians live in fear in Syria’
- Oscar Pistorius vomits during graphic testimony
- Toronto Mayor Rob Ford flubs daylight saving time advice: ‘Turn your clocks back’
- Americans don’t support sending U.S. troops to Ukraine
- Florida lawmakers move to wipe corrupt ‘Boss Hogg’ town from map
- N.C. math whiz to unveil secret of March Madness picks
- An appealing offer: Chiquita merges with Fyffes to make world’s largest banana firm
- Amnesty International says Syria guilty of war crimes for food blockade
- Mitch McConnell on beating tea party: ‘We are going to crush them’
NY judge hearing Google book case grows impatient
NEW YORK (AP) - A judge warned lawyers for authors and publishers and Google Tuesday that he will decide whether snippets of books can be sold online without the permission of copyright holders if the sides do not settle their 6-year-old case soon with an agreement to create a massive online library.
"It's been a long time," Federal Judge Denny Chin told the lawyers in Manhattan as they updated him on the status of negotiations aimed at reaching a new deal after the judge in March rejected an earlier settlement, citing antitrust concerns. That $125 million deal had drawn hundreds of objections from Google rivals, consumer watchdogs, academic experts, literary agents and even foreign governments.
In March, Chin wrote that many objectors would drop their complaints if Mountain View, Calif.-based Google Inc. allowed book owners to choose to join the library rather than being required to quit it. The judge expressed pessimism Tuesday that a new deal could be reached, noting that Google had once said it would never agree to an opt-in settlement. Still, he gave both sides until Sept. 15 to report back to him.
He said another unsuccessful set of negotiations would set the case on a trial path and leave him to decide whether snippets of books can be considered "fair use" of published materials. A "fair use" argument would rely on a provision of copyright law that sometimes allows original content to be used by others, in part for educational purposes.
Michael J. Boni, a lawyer for The Authors Guild, said a deal with Google that would rely on an opt-in format was the "precise settlement we have been aiming for."
He said both sides were well aware that Chin had made clear in his rejection of the earlier deal that an opt-in library was the easiest way to clear legal obstacles to what Chin has acknowledged would be a benefit to many people.
The judge has said that such a digital universe for books would let libraries, schools, researchers and disadvantaged populations gain access to far more books, would help authors and publishers find new audiences and new sources of income and would allow older books _ particularly those out of print _ to be preserved and be given new life.
In asking for more time to negotiate, Boni said both sides had been working diligently with phone conference calls and in person meetings.
"We are not there yet your honor," he said. "These are very complicated, complex issues that require us to delve into the dog days of summer."
Google attorney Daralyn Durie let Boni describe the status of negotiations. She only commented when Chin offered the services of a magistrate judge or a senior judge to help the talks.
She said there were "business issues in addition to legal issues we're trying to work through."
After the hearing, she declined to comment, pointing toward a Google spokesman, Gabriel Stricker. He said Google had been "working closely" with the authors and publishers to explore options after the judge rejected the previous settlement. "Regardless of the outcome, we'll continue to make books more discoverable and useful through Google Books and Google eBooks."
Google Books is a searchable index of literary works while Google eBooks allows readers to access books wirelessly on digital devices.
Google already has scanned more than 15 million books for the project. Under the original agreement, Google had planned to put about 130 million titles into its digital library.
The lawsuit was first brought in 2005 by authors and publishers after Google failed to obtain copyright permission to scan the books. A deal was first reached in 2008 and was tentatively approved by the judge in November 2009. The Department of Justice in 2009 concluded that the agreement probably violated antitrust law and could decrease competition among U.S. publishers and drive up prices for consumers.
TWT Video Picks
Taxpayers must pay the freight for over-budget train projects
- Kim Jong-un calls for execution of 33 Christians
- Rand Paul wins 2014 CPAC straw poll, Ted Cruz finishes a distant second
- Senate Democrats, Republicans spar over restoring unemployment benefits
- CURL: Today's GOP really is Reagan's 'Big Tent' party
- As Crimea falls, Obama takes Key Largo golf vacation, Biden hits Virgin Islands
- Mitch McConnell on beating tea party: 'We are going to crush them'
- SAUERBREY: Taxing Marylanders until they flee
- Russia besieges Crimea as U.S. seeks diplomacy; Putin remains undeterred by Obama's sanctions
- Investigators puzzle: How does a 777 jetliner just disappear into thin air?
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
Pope Francis meets his 'mini-me'
Celebrity deaths in 2014
Winter storm hits states — again