When reading the fifth chapter of Siva Vaidhyanathan's book The Googilization of Everything (And Why We Should Worry), I could not help but be intrigued by the idea of online books.
I do consider myself an avid reader. There has been more than one instance where I have bought a book and then found myself staying up all night until I finished it. I have read entire novels in less than a day. Friends and family have often looked at me in amazement. They don't understand how I can be so still for so long. My answer to this is simple. When I find a novel that touches on subjects that I find interesting or that I can relate to I am brought to another world where time does not exist. I immerse myself into the lives of the fictional characters, enabling myself to relate to them. All I know is that when I read, I never want the story to end.
Perhaps this is why the theory of "Google Books" is very interesting to me. The first thing that came to mind when I read of this idea was genius. I truly thought it was an amazing idea. The sheer convenience of books on the Internet was enough to sell me on the idea. Any book you want with the click of a button. But then I realized something. Part of the reason I love reading is because I love books. I cannot picture myself cuddling up with my computer late at night entranced in a novel. I'm addicted to the comfort physical books give me. I love folding over the corner of my page. I love the feeling of a worn out spine. These are things that I would miss if they were to suddenly disappear.
Do not get me wrong I do appreciate the Internet and all of the things it is capable of. But I do still believe that some things are meant to stay as they are. I believe that if something is not broken one shouldn't try to fix it. Let things be, has become my mantra of sorts.
Apparently I am not the only one who felt this way. When the concept of Google Books first arose, many distinguished individuals were very supportive. Lawrence Lessig, Harvard law professor and copyright reform advocate, stated "a good deal that could be the basis for something really fantastic" (Vaidhyanathan 153). It was not too long later that he came to another realization "the settlement would not only fail to loosen up American copyright law but might even restrict and commercialize the flow of digital knowledge" (Vaidhyanathan 153). No surprise later he withdrew his previous support.
After careful scrutiny, others came forward with their negative opinions of Google Books. Some include Robert Darnton who just so happens to be the head of one of the original Google library partner, Harvard University Libraries. the government of France and Germany felt that "Google Books would give Google an unfair advantage in the market for out-of-print texts" (Vaidhyanathan 153). Book author is China even went to the extent of suing Google for scanning their books without permission, infringing this copyrights. Before the concept ever even took off, multiple parties disagreed with its creation.
Clearly these parties have different reason for not agreeing with the development of Google Books than I do. Their main concern is the issue of copyright. By scanning the books of these distinguished universities, Google would be infringing on the copyright laws developed many years ago. This is definitely an extreme issue of concern. obviously these laws were put in place for a reason. They are there to protect the rights of any and all authors and contributors who would be at risk of being plagiarized.
Ultimately Google Books failed. It brought up far to many issue for anyone to support its cause. In retrospect it was a good idea. But as I mentioned before there will be times when the Internet is not the answer and that things should be left as they are.
References
Vaidhyanathan, Siva. "The Googlization of Knowledge: The Googlization of Books."The Googlization of Everything: (and Why We Should Worry). Berkeley: University of California, 2011. 153. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment