the i-witnesses

Microsoft weighs in to the online library debate

Last month I blogged about Google’s plan to ‘liberate’ hardbound books by creating an online global library. Today Microsoft accused the project of systematically violating the copyright of authors.

As part of ongoing rivalries between Microsoft and Google the former launched its own ‘Live Search Books’ service last December, which currently provides access to non-copyrighted texts. Their clients include the British Library, University of California and University of Toronto.

The Authors Guild – a professional association for American writers – opposes Google’s initiative because it digitises books from various libraries without the written consent of individual authors. In contrast, according to Microsoft’s Danielle Tiedt, its service will only digitise copyrighted books when prior consent has been obtained.

But hold on a minute… As an alumnus of the London School of Economics, I’m allowed inside the library to read its books. But I’m not allowed to copy material, and I cannot access Microsoft Office programmes on the computer system. The librarian told me: “The contract with Microsoft is exclusive to students”.

So much for Microsoft’s principles. Of course, we all know that corporations are ruthless when it comes to making profits – whether they are Microsoft or Google. But my question is: what legal right do libraries (which are often publicly funded) have to hand over ‘their’ knowledge to commercial organisations?

The world’s library on my desktop

An article in this month’s Prospect magazine about Google’s online library project deserves serious attention.

In just three years’ time, Google.com is set to reveal the world’s largest online library, which will make 15 million books available in a digital format. Using web searching techniques, these books can be cross-searched, citations can be linked etc etc. In fact, a prototype – called the ‘google book search’ – is already available.

Sounds great, I hear you say. No more trudging to the library, only to discover the book you want is out on loan. But there’s a catch: these services don’t come cheap.

Although Google is making much of its collaborative ‘digitisation projects’ with Stanford and Oxford Universities, users will ultimately have to pay expensive subscriptions to get full access to the online books. Some revenue will go back to the original source. But I wonder if these venerable institutions have really thought through the implications.

While, in principle, making the world’s libraries available online is an incredible idea, I fear it may only serve to limit access to knowledge to those who can afford it.