Happy farmers and googly-mad writers

The blessed 60 day extension to the Madrona Farm fundraising campaign has yielded some truly gratifying results. Written up in Guy Dauncey's EcoNews, it caught the attention of a right thinking reader, Mel McDonald, who came up with the $200,000 that was needed for a matching donation by Ed Johnston, which reduced the amount needed to an entirely manageable sounding $287,000 - by March 31st. Still a lot of money to come up with, but "a lot" is certainly less than "a staggering amount". And it's a pittance compared with the amount that's been raised - $1,413,000 so far.

A group of BC writers are carrying on their declamation of the Google Book Settlement as the final opt-out date looms hugely (January 28) before us. This is the date to opt out or opt back in if you went out but changed your mind. If you're just plain mad, there's a letter of protest (Canadian Writers Against Google Settlement petition) being sent to the US courts: to add your name, send it quickly to dvbolt@aol.com . Writers who are spending this last day on the fence are advised to devote some small part of it reading this FAQ on the settlement by the (US) National Writers Union.

Climate Change & Google Books

Here's a bit of 60's style prescience that Gabe passed along, which might have been a more weirdly entertaining warm-up (ha ha) viewing for all at Copenhagen than what they got. Have you ever seen anything so strange?



I also love this take on Cap & Trade, which explains the notion in words of few syllables but with great passion. Maybe they need to see this in Copenhagen as well.

As for the rest of my life, I've been preoccupied with a sick laptop followed by a sick dog followed by a sick me, compounded by general busyness and the near audible crunch of deadlines...

Sat in on a Google Book Settlement webinar with Access Copyright today, which was enlightening. The new and revised settlement has some encouraging improvements, from Canadian writers' perspective. One key change is the settlement is limited to works published in Canada, the US, the UK and Australia, making 50% fewer works included than previously. That Google has already violated the copyright of everyone else is up to them, unfortunately, to sort out separately.

Another interesting point we discussed is that opted-in writers can ask to have their books removed from Google Book Search, and the request will be honoured (though Google still gets to keep a copy of your book). However, if you are opted out, you can ask to have your books removed, and Google says it will honour the request, but if it doesn't, it will be up to you to chase them for copyright infringement.

The arguments for remaining in the settlement - and claiming the settlement fee for having your copyright so publicly violated - are that if you are in, you have more control over what Google does with your books; you can negotiate to have better fees (than the current 63% author/37% Google split) going forward; you are no longer precluded from seeking and making better deals with new digitizing operations; and you can withdraw your book or change the size of the "snippet" (one of the most contentious aspects since some books are presented almost in their entirety at present). But the question of how your new books - published since January 2009 - will be handled remains an unknown; we got no advice on that score other than to monitor Google Book Search. You can't, apparently, demand that your new and future books be excluded from future digitization.

Last goggle at google settlement

The Google Book Settlement opting-0ut deadline is upon us: by September 4 you must decide whether you're in or out. Staying in means allowing Google to digitize and own (for distribution purposes) your copyrighted works, for which you will be compensated (via a registry and your publishers) what remains of the approximately $60 per book after any fees or percentages have been deducted.

The dissenting voices in the Writers Union of Canada (TWUC) have offered the following view, relevant bits excerpted:

Google controls all the information and, there is no auditing system in place to prove their numbers.

It would be a minimum of five years before any money is received.

By opting in (or doing nothing), writers give Google non-exclusive rights to copyrighted material.

There are other electronic options [besides] Google [--and these might better compensate copyright holders].

To opt out... access Google online but no proof of receipt is generated from this. ...a registered letter should also be mailed to Google. As an additional safeguard ...a separate letter should also be written to Google, telling them that they do not have the rights to digitize your material without your express permission.

For future contracts... an “out of print” clause should be added to protect copyrighted material.

Some internal discussion points out that the settlement addresses past wrongs (the unauthorized digitization of copyrighted works) but frees Google to sail ahead unrestricted in future, which seems hardly fair to the people who've worked so hard to create those works. And that other electronic options besides Google may afford the possibility of earning more than the pittance Google offers.

Googley do

Several of us sat in on a web conference call this week to learn more about how the Google Book Settlement affects Canadian authors. The call included a review of the powerpoint presentation found here in pdf, on the Access Copyright site.

There is more information available on Google, including a way to check whether your (in-print) books have been digitized by Google up to January 5, 2009, and are therefore covered by the settlement.

Be warned, you must create a Registry account in order to search for your books, and this registry asks for a lot of personal information; you can't proceed to the search screen until you provide it. Surely this is some kind of violation of privacy? I have written to Rust Consulting (a Minneapolis-based "trusted leader for complex data management...claims processing and award distribution"), who appears to be the owner of the registry, with the following questions; I'll let you know if I get an answer:

• Why is this amount of information required for a search to see if I'm included? Why not ask for it only if/when the search has produced results for a claim?
• If I'm not included, what do you intend to do with my personal information?
• Why does your form not explain which fields are required fields? You obviously know which ones are required.

But back to your created works. If your books are covered, you have until January 5, 2010 to claim for payment; or until May 5, 2009 to opt out (if, for example, you want to pursue your own claim through the courts with Google). The money set aside for compensating authors for the violation of copyright entailed by the digitization project amounts to a stonking great payment of around $60 per book for single-authored books. Hurrah! Enough for a bottle of champagne (or slightly more cava or prosecco).

The reason authors are pursuing this is that Google, whose stated mission is "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful" (while reaping huge corporate profits themselves), has in this ambition conveniently side-stepped any responsibility to allow authors to earn a living from their writings. Which is the whole point of copyright.

During the web conference, one author wondered why libraries thought they had the right to offer their collections for free digitization, when they do not own the copyright. Nobody had a good answer on this call; it would be interesting to hear a library's reasoning.

The whole process is skewed towards the interests of everybody except the people who created the work being passed around for free. The libraries who donate their collections to the project get a digitized copy back; the authors of those works do not.

Bookishness

Have received a couple of notices now about the Google Book settlement. Anyone who owns a US copyright interest in a book that might be included in Google's mass digitization enterprise (apparently this is any US author (or heirs) and any author (or heirs) whose country has copyright agreements with the US = so, just about every published person I'd know) is invited to read the settlement notice and get their forms in by the relevant deadline (to opt out and reserve the right to sue Google, it's May 2009; those wanting cash settlements for digitized works have until January 2010). Members of Access Copyright can sign up for web seminars to learn more.

Thursday night's Malahat Review reading to celebrate The Green Imagination - the environmental issue - and tribute to former editor Constance Rooke, was exceedingly well attended. Audience members were plied with cake and offered fair trade coffee and Silk Road teas; palms were crossed with chocolate to fortify us in our quest for seats in an overflowing 150-seat theatre.

The event began with a song



and then an intro by the issue's editor, Jay Ruzesky,



followed by readings of prose and poetry. A question and answer session followed, with all available contributors



back on stage. Here, Lilburn speaks



Tim Lilburn; Malahat's editor supremo, John Barton; Carol Matthews.



Philip Kevin Paul, Melanie Siebert, John Harley, Sonnet L’Abbé.