Disappointed
I haven’t been one of the Google Books doomsayers heretofore, because the participating libraries have observed Dorothea’s First Law of Digitization: “Always control your bits.”
I’m not happy with the CIC right now (despite, I should note, working for a CIC institution), because from all appearances they didn’t heed the First Law. Bad contract negotiators, no biscuit.
Nothing to be done about it now, I suppose, but let me suggest this to all libraries in any stage of Google Books negotiations (including just considering such negotiations): If we must have escrow for copyrighted bits—and I don’t have an opinion on that, not being a lawyer or a copyright strategist—at least don’t leave the fox in the henhouse. Google should not be the escrower. Toss the bits at Portico, toss them at the Library of Congress, toss them at the DLF, toss them at a dark archive, whatever—but find a trusted third party.
I suppose I’m fine with Google funding that third party to hold the bits for the time being, though I don’t consider it ideal and I hope the third party would be smart enough to have a backup funding plan. I’m not fine with Google demanding the escrow, not (to all appearances) having a clear plan for taking work out of escrow, and holding the bits. That’s unsound practice.
Truthfully, I think Google’s missing a trick here too. Publishers are slavering to go after deep-pocketed, for-profit Google for the least hint of an actionable cause. Publishers aren’t slavering to fight libraries. They do it, to be sure; I thought the AAP’s e-reserves hunt would die a quiet and ignominious death owing to fears of awakening the slumbering faculty behemoth. I was wrong. The hunt hasn’t stopped; it’s just gone underground.
But at least it’s gone underground. That’s protection that I would think Google would find intriguing. Apparently not.
Please, library contract negotiators. Google out of the henhouse. Please.