[pd-discuss] BL and google digitise books

Thu Jun 23 12:09:13 UTC 2011

Dear all,

Op 23-06-11 14:02, Paul Keller <pk at kl.nl> schreef:

>> However, without taking on specific situations for campaigns, our experience
>> is that abstract policy debates do not generate pressure on politicians and
>> institutions to change.
>> 
>> We want to start pushing these issues but we need a broader network to help
>> define the priorities.
> 
> maybe this is something where communia can get involved. i could imagine
> compiling a yearly list of questionable practices across europe or somthing
> similar...

I like this idea!

Best,

Maarten

> best, paul 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Javier
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 21 June 2011 12:11, Paul Keller <pk at kl.nl> wrote:
>> not sure if this is a worthy battle. obviously this is a situation which is
>> far from optimal (but not special: this seems to be similar to the deals
>> google has with all other participating libraries in europe) but the question
>> is if it is realistic to expect that a campaign could change this.
>> 
>> Google is not doing anything that is wrong per-se (this is public domain
>> material so they can do whatever they want with it, that is if you want the
>> beauty of it).
>> With regards to the BL there might be more of an issue since they are a
>> publicly funded organization that should be more accountable to principles
>> like open and equal access. however, i think in in times where public money
>> for digitization seems to be on the retreat and these PPPs become one of the
>> only ways to get large amounts of material online i do not think that a
>> campaign has the potential to result in anything productive.
>> 
>> The core of the issue comes down to the simple question do we want a proper
>> public digital infrastructure (that would require public funding) or are we
>> willing to live with the trade-offs that result from these PPPs. If we really
>> want to push for the public scenario then that means that we also need to
>> push for the funding required to get this implemented.... /paul
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 21 Jun 2011, at 10:57, Jonathan Gray wrote:
>> 
>>> Javier: I would definitely ask Paul Keller (in cc) and other folks at
>>> Communia for their opinion on the value of this. They know the sector,
>>> and the probable/possible impact of campaigns in this area, much
>>> better than I do!
>>> 
>>> J.
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Javier Ruiz
>>> <javier at openrightsgroup.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Unfortunately even after the calculation is done and material is PD,
>>>>> it is not clear that digital copies will be open as in
>>>>> opendefinition.org (and hence free for anyone to use without
>>>>> restriction).
>>>>> 
>>>>> E.g. I understand the material from BL is unfortunately still rights
>>>>> encumbered [1], possibly due to contractual obligations (with
>>>>> Google?).
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Would the access conditions here be a worthy battle?
>>>> Open Rights Groups is meant to campaign on this sort of thing, but taking
>>>> on
>>>> Google and BL would require a supportive effort from our wider networks,
>>>> even if other organisations do not have campaigning mandate.
>>>> Javier
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> pd-discuss mailing list
>>>> pd-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/pd-discuss
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Jonathan Gray
>>> 
>>> Community Coordinator
>>> The Open Knowledge Foundation
>>> http://blog.okfn.org
>>> 
>>> http://twitter.com/jwyg
>>> http://identi.ca/jwyg
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> pd-discuss mailing list
>> pd-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/pd-discuss
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> pd-discuss mailing list
>> pd-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/pd-discuss
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pd-discuss mailing list
> pd-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/pd-discuss