

Any other authors on here horrified at Google Book Search? - eob

I wrote a book on Ruby on Rails over the course of 2007-2008. While checking out Google Books for the first time today, I searched for my own book and found that the India branch of my publisher (John Wiley &#38; Sons) posted virtually the entire text online for reading (http://books.google.com/books?id=za3qrVS3bwYC&#38;source=gbs_navlinks_s).  Investigating further, there apparently is some sort of class action which gives Google the right to do this with all publications, whether or not the author even knows about it or agrees to it.<p>Having spent about a year of late nights and neglecting my friends &#38; family to put this book together, I am horrified. I'm a big believer in open source, and have contributed to more than a few open source projects, but I also believe that the hard work of individuals shouldn't be pillaged by companies with giant legal departments.<p>Authors / readers on HN: Am I right to be angry? Have you had a similar experience with this?
======
jzdziarski
The same principles apply here as they do to piracy (which is essentially what
Google is doing)... If the book is any good people will buy it regardless. I
have several books out that are doing quite well in spite of widespread piracy
or appearing on Google. I've surmised that a majority of any book's sales are
going to be made by honest people, and therefore any perceived monetary loss
from piracy (or Googleiracy) is not in fact loss at all, but just a matter of
whether or not the trolls have been fed.

In addition to this, having your book pirated/circulated could actually lead
to more sales because it'll fall across the eyes of more "honest" readers who
will buy the book if it's any good, regardless of whether they found it
online.

Also see: Libraries.

~~~
eob
> Also see: Libraries.

Ha :). But the library isn't providing a download link, is it?

Regarding a majority of a book's sales being made by honest people, yes, I
assume you're right. And perhaps the publicity from being available for free
will increase the number of honest people that buy a book.

But it is a tricky line to walk.

I remember reading about how the Soviets were suspicious of supposed "free
markets" being able to stabilize themselves in the Reagan / Thatcher era. They
just couldn't believe that things would work out to an equilibrium in the end.
Auctions are similarly magical.

Perhaps the "give it away, and then let people pay you if they like it" model
of the internet is similar from the standpoint of an outsider: sounds
impossible the first time you hear it, but it tends to work out in the end.

~~~
jzdziarski
It's not really "give it away, let people pay", it's more, "let people choose
whether to pay or steal". Bezos' prediction that e-commerce would "work" when
it became easier to buy than to steal has been true now for several years, and
I think that's a better principle to go by than trusting soviet economics :)

~~~
Saavedro
Definitely. Convenience is key for digital goods. I could never bring myself
to install iTunes, but I spend -loads- of money on amazon mp3, because it's as
convenient as any regular download link, it just happens to charge me money.
The downloader for amazon mp3 (which isn't even required for single songs) is
also extremely lightweight compared to iTunes.

------
mbrubeck
1) Your book is available for "Limited Preview" only, not "Full View." Google
will let users search within the book, and will show them a limited number of
pages. It won't let them read the book from start to finish. (I was able to
read 18 pages.) Next to the "preview" it displays links to buy the book from
various retailers.

2) Do you think Google hurts websites by letting people search their contents
and see excerpts in the search results? How many websites would benefit by
using robots.txt to prevent Google from linking to them? Is web publishing as
an industry helped or harmed by the availability of web search engines?

3) This page explains the Authors Guild settlement from Google's point of
view: <http://books.google.com/googlebooks/agreement/>

Here's a good summary of thoughtful criticism about the settlement:
<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090204/0248153640.shtml>

and a thoughtful take by lawyer and copyright activist (and Creative Commons
founder) Lawrence Lessig:
[http://lessig.org/blog/2008/10/on_the_google_book_search_agr...](http://lessig.org/blog/2008/10/on_the_google_book_search_agre.html)

Here's where you can opt out of the settlement class (retaining the right to
sue Google on your own, relinquishing any benefits Google has promised in the
settlement, and giving you an option to remove your book from the index):
<http://www.googlebooksettlement.com/>

4) Personally I think the settlement has its flaws, but if I were an author
I'd rather have my work searchable at Google than not, including under the
current settlement terms.

------
kolya3
Before getting angry, consider the positives as well. There are roughly 3
camps of people reading your book online:

(1) This group will use your book as a free reference because it's available
but _cannot buy your book_ (think poor student, 15 year old with no credit
card and other priorities, third world country - too expensive). You didn't
gain a paying reader but they are not hitting your existing stash of cash,
just potential earnings. On the plus side, they know of you now because of
your book. Maybe you can actually get paid for a speaking gig.

(2) This group will peruse your book online a few times but _will buy it_
because they prefer to have a hard copy they can read in their cubicle, on the
train, etc. A win for you.

(3) This group can afford your book and _would have bought the book but now
will not_ since it's available online. A loss for you. However I have a hunch
(though no data) that this group is a minority especially when it comes to the
well paid (and often reimbursed) group of engineers who are the market for
your book.

------
tokenadult
What did your book contract say about your rights with regard to international
editions? Could you quote the contract language exactly, so we have a better
sense of what rights may or may not have been violated?

~~~
eob
I will try to dig it up later this afternoon and paste in in here.

My assumption is that because I share rights with Wiley, they can do as they
please with the text. So from a legal standpoint I assume no agreements have
been violated.

Where I _do_ feel violated is my understanding of a mutual desire between
publisher & author to sell the work. I imagine their calculation is that once
publication costs have been recovered, if the book isn't a best seller it may
be more worth their while to give away the book and use it to build their
brand. This is completely at odds with the motivations & needs of the author,
even if it is within their right.

I understand that electronic text is a non-rival good, so the following
example isn't a perfect one, but it is like if you and I went in 50/50 on
importing lemons to sell on the side of the road at neighboring stands. Then,
the moment I recovered my costs, I began given the rest of my lemons away for
free, completely obliterating your ability to sell lemons for a price, and
thus removing _your_ ability to recoup _your_ costs. It may be legal, but it
is a pretty lowly thing to do. I end up breaking even and you end up with a
net negative.

------
sophacles
The best index writers can't match a decent full text search. For that reason
I fully support google book search -- It's easier to re-find information I
already read. I have read books on google books, and then didn't buy them, but
I wouldn't have bought the book anyway, particularly technical books. At least
this way I may recommend your book to someone.

