It is amazing how many moms over look this one ……

I am a self-publisher of eight books, only one of which is out of print–but it has been supplanted by a second edition that contains all the same material, with additions and updates. I have a website. My books are carried by Ingram (the industry’s largest wholesaler), by Amazon.com, and by numerous other bookstores locatable on the web.

I do not know whether Google scanned my books, because Google has not made their database of scanned books publicly available. I have never seen any public statement from Google (only extensive author speculation) as to how, if at all, the public database represented by Google Book Search compares to Google’s private database of books scanned for the Library Project.

Back when the Author’s Guild suit was filed, Google set up a website where copyright holders could list their titles as “not to be scanned” by the Library Project. This was for copyright holders who were not Google Partners, and the site stated the books withdrawn from scanning consideration would also be absent from Google Book Search. I listed all my books in a timely way. However, five of my eight books (one searchable only by title, not author) are now listed on Google Book Search. No text is available, which would be a sure sign that they were scanned, so I don’t know why any data is on Google Book Search when Google said it would not be. I do not object to bibliographic data alone being there, but I would very much like to know whether this means my books were scanned against my express wishes.

In January 2009, I opted out of the entire Settlement (the unrevised version), via a letter written by a copyright lawyer and sent by certified mail to the Settlement Administrator. I understand why he advised me to send a certified letter, because I’ve seen Google’s on-line opt-out form in operation. Pretty much every time you register or buy something on the net, you get a confirmation web page and/or email. After submitting Google’s opt-out-of-the-Settlement form, you get nothing. You do not know whether your opt-out data was registered and you cannot legally prove later that you opted out. I advise any copyright holder who opted out using the online form, to follow this up with a certified letter.

Then I tried to find out whether my books had been scanned—which information I think should be freely available to all copyright holders, to help them decide whether to opt out of or into the Settlement. I received a form response that said this information would only be released if I opted IN “for fear of false claims.” I said I was only interested in my own books, and submitted full bibliographic information on each, including ISBNs. I received the same response. But I’ve also seen the opt-in form. All it requires is basic bibliographic information that someone who did want to make a false claim could easily find on Amazon and numerous other places.

And: The revised version of the Settlement still contains that paragraph near the end of the main part that says Google will not commit to _not_ publishing the titles of those who have opted out of the entire Settlement.

Some authors have asked me, why not remain in the Settlement and just opt out my in-print titles? I don’t do business with anyone I can’t trust. I don’t want a publisher (Google) who has massively and knowingly violated copyright law. I don’t want a publisher who theoretically offers me opt-outs (options) but will not commit to honoring them. I don’t want a publisher who will not give me open information about what they have done with my books. I don’t want a publisher who scans my books, then offers me a contract negotiated between themselves and another party (the Author’s Guild) the terms of which I cannot negotiate. Nor can I effectively protest if Google makes a “mistake” and sells any in-print titles that I opted out of the Settlement. (Having to go to Google’s arbitration if they make a “mistake” is a shuck.) I don’t want a publisher who tells me they will do anything they want with my copyrighted material without my prior permission, and pay me what they choose, and that all I can do is lie down and take it.

Then you are as guilty as Google of theft. Fair Use doesn’t cut it as that is primarily part of American Law. Worldwide ‘fair use’ differs.

Orphan Works is also a red herring. The point is simple: is a book in copyright or out of copyright? If out of copyright anyone can do anything with it. If in copyright you need permission. Saying it is an “orphan work” is akin to saying no one has lived in a house for years, can’t trace the owner, so it’s ok to break into it or try and sell it to someone else. I realise copyrights aren’t houses but they are RIGHTS, and authors have the right not to have their work spattered across the internet without their permission. Are you going to trot out the ‘doing them a favour’ argument next?