Harvey, If Google would just scan in the non copyrighted material it would be a tremendous benefit. Most of the copyrighted material is available through inter-library loan and from our own libraries. However, as I understand it Google wants to disassemble the books to scan them in. I do not believe this to be necessary as scanners can be (and I suspect already have been) developed that will scan around an open page in a book. With the money they are spending this would be a small cost and save the books from destruction. The important point is to get the information out to the people that need it. I wish them all the success with this project.
icones ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harvey Brenneise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Orchid Guide Digest" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 4:07 PM Subject: [OGD] Google Print > Some of you may be aware of Google's project called Google Print (and the > Google Print Library Project). I don't think it's an exaggeration to say > that their intention is to digitize ALL of the world's print literature > and > make it searchable on the web (see the beta version at print.google.com), > at > least as far as possible. Copyright aside and given that the world's > published literature is probably under 100 million titles (my personal > guess > based on the number of records--over 50 million in OCLC WorldCat, the > repository of library shared cataloging records), including the very > obscure, it may well now be technically feasible to do so! > > Scanning is one thing, viewing the search results (at least large sections > of books) is another matter, of course, because of copyright restrictions. > Google has partnered with the libraries at Oxford, Michigan, Stanford, NY > Public and Harvard in this endeavor. It seems that Michigan is the only > one > that is allowing scanning of all of its titles (with full display access > limited to on-campus users along a promise of litigation from some > publishers). The otherlibraries are reported to have limited the scanning > to those titles that are in the public domain (basically pre-1923). > > A report I read recently stated that the resulting "library" will be 10.5 > million titles, with only a little over half in English, and somewhere > around 20% being in the public domain (I don't have the article in front > of > me, and I don't remember if these figures reflect the complete holdings of > these libraries or only those parts that they will allow to be digitized > at > this time). It should be noted that some publishers are participating > voluntarily as they do with Amazon. > > After a huge outcry from publishers over Google doing this without > specific > permission from them, there has been a pause in the project along with a > promise that publishers can "opt out" if they want to. Whether this will > suffice remains to be seen. Of course, those publishers that are > participating voluntarily are no doubt considering this free advertising > that will result in more book sales. Presumably some of them have had a > successful experience with this in Amazon. > > One of the problems that the project has uncovered is what to do about the > millions of out of print titles that are not in the public domain--in many > cases, the copyright holder can't even be located. I would also note that > the web (Alibris, Amazon, etc., even eBay) have also completely changed > the > way used books are sold, as well as their availability, not that this > would > help the publishers or copyright holders. > > It's not clear to me what they're doing with periodicals, although I > noticed > Science came up in one of my searches (probably a voluntary participant). > I > also note that in order to view some hits, one must sign in using a Google > account. The site also notes that in the future they will be looking for > additional titles in special collections and other libraries that have > titles not in the collections of the participating libraries (a > considerable > number, I would think, particularly in non-English, older titles, and > titles > in specialized areas not represented in the original 5). In addition, > Yahoo > has announced a rival plan (using the collections of the University of > California--not clear to me if only Berkeley or more), as has a group in > Europe. > > I'd like to hear some comments about the implications for orchidists. > It's > still very early in the project, but perhaps not too early to evaluate its > potential usefulness. One thing that I noted in my own searching is that > often we orchidists are only looking for a relatively small piece of data > rather than to read a whole book. As a result, many orchid books are > reference in nature (lots of pieces of data) rather than a narrative > monograph as in language or history. If this is the case, simply having > the > tremendous indexing and search capabilities of Google, plus a rich > database > of scanned titles might be of considerable interest AND use precisely > because we won't want to read more than a page or two at a time. > > I'll note in passing that the now-defunct AOS digital orchid project also > highlighted yet again that there is MUCH beautiful and useful information > in > books in the public domain, most of which are long out of print and may > even > be rare. It only takes one good copy to create a digital image, though. > It > is my hope that these will quickly find their way into projects such as > this. > > I did a little search on Paphiopedilum venustum and found 22 pages in 9 > books, along with one hit for Paphiopedilum venustus (an Oxford University > Press book--typo or scanning error?). In addition I found additional > citations to "paph. venustum" and "P. venustum," demonstrating yet again > the > nomenclatural problems of searching botanical names, not to mention > taxonomic ones. > > One thing that I think the AOS, RHS and others could do to make the > project > more useful to orchidists would be to identify all of the titles that > they'd > like to see digitized (beginning certainly with the older titles) and > assisting Google in getting them into the database. Another area that > would > also be useful, I would think, is to see if there are partners willing to > enhance the metadata (so that retrievals are more consistent) and even to > begin translating projects for those items in the public domain and making > them available on the web or through this project. > > > Comments are welcome. > > Sincerely, > Harvey Brenneise > > BTW, is there any news on that "AOS Bulletin" project? I've been out of > the > loop for awhile, but I recall that about 4 years ago we were promised a > product in about a year. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) > [email protected] > http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com > _______________________________________________ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [email protected] http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
