Authors warned of digitisation threat

"I wouldn't want to see people giving one company hundreds of thousands of books and thinking it doesn't matter, when in fact it does," Adrian Laing, a lawyer specialising in media and publishing issues, told seminar attendees at the London Book Fair.

Google's Google Print and Amazon's Look Inside programs have caused controversy in the publishing world. While both companies claim that making books searchable and viewable online can increase sales, and offer to digitise such texts for free, publishers and authors have expressed concerns over copyright violations. The topic has stirred major interest at the Book Fair -- the largest publishing gathering in the English-speaking world -- and a series of seminars on Google's program have attracted capacity crowds.

"Amazon and Google seem to presume that publishers and librarians are the ones who have the right to authorise digitisation," Laing said, adding that that such a view was likely to be wrong if there were not already specific clauses in author contracts to cover digitisation rights.

"The right belongs to the copyright owner. The right to actually scan and store and display the entire work is not something publishers should presume they have the right to do."

Google has claimed that its scanning of books is covered under fair use considerations in copyright law. Laing noted that the concept of fair use, often discussed in copyright cases, was largely peculiar to the US, while Europe had a far more limited 'fair dealing' provision. "Copyright for the most part is an international subject," he said.

Rules relating to translation and typographical rights further muddied the picture, Laing noted: "Do not presume that because a work is out of copyright you can do with it what you want."

A common problem in both contracts is that the companies reserve the right to effectively change any clause, making it hard for authors and publishers to determine what rights they are giving up or maintaining. Even if the contracts are cancelled, disputes could arise over continued use of the digitised files by either service, Laing said.

"If the contract is terminated, who owns the rights in the file itself? I'll tell you, it's not you," Laing said. Other problems with the Google and Amazon schemes were noted as well. "I judge the quality of a contract by the quality of its definitions, and Amazon doesn't have any," Laing said.

Laing warned against signing the standard contract offered for digitisation by either company. "This sort of clause where you have a moving target, that's just not a fair deal from my perspective."

Some larger publishers might be able to get specific clauses adjusted. "They will need to come down from the mountain and start talking to people [eventually]," Laing said.