This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major
websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Google, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Google and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GoogleWikipedia:WikiProject GoogleTemplate:WikiProject GoogleGoogle articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Google Books is part of WikiProject Open Access, a collaborative attempt at improving the coverage of topics related to
Open Access and at improving other articles with the help of materials from Open Access sources. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of open tasks.Open AccessWikipedia:WikiProject Open/Open access task forceTemplate:WikiProject Open AccessOpen access articles
I am curious that there is no discussion of commercial aspects of the operation at this time. Google is a for-profit operation and presumably either derives, or intends to derive in the future, a commercial return on its investment either through subscription services, advertising revenue or other means. Can someone who knows more about this aspect myself maybe introduce a relevant section to the page? Regards - Tony
Tony 1212 (
talk)
20:41, 23 March 2016 (UTC)reply
I have just boldly merged
Google Books Library Project into this article. To be fair, the Library Project is the essence of Google Books. The other part of it, Partner Program, is associated with just a single paragraph of content. Which means there is a huge scope commonness between the two articles. They largely cover the same topic. This is exemplified as until now, half of the criticism (copyright issues) was predominantly covered at
Google Books whereas the other half (academic criticism) was covered at
Google Books Library Project. It makes sense to have a single consolidated article rather than two articles on the same subject.
103.6.159.81 (
talk)
10:31, 16 April 2016 (UTC)reply
Under Copyright infringement, fair use and related issues the following paragraphs have numerous spelling and other issues.
In 2015 Authors Guild filed another appeal against Google to be considered by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. Google won the case unanimously based on the argument that they were not showing people the full texts but instead snippets and there are not allowing people to illegally read the book.[105] In a report courts stated that they did not infringe on copy write laws as they were protected under the fair use clause.[106]
Authors Guild tried again in 2016 to appeal the decision and this time took their case to be considered by the Supreme Court. The case was rejected leaving the Second Circuits decision on the case in tact meaning that Google did not violate copy right laws.[107] This case also set a precedent for other case similar in regards to fair use laws as it further clarified the law and expands it. Such clarification is important in the new digital age as it effects other scanning projects similar to Google.[105]
Where did most of the site's content? Why did it informally or secretly removed? Now, most of this article can be washed, as the site is almost empty place.--
95.24.27.53 (
talk)
14:05, 19 October 2016 (UTC)reply
Create a section on Content - regarding the quantity and types of content present
Create #Website functionality - comprising content from last para of #Details, #Linking, #My Library.
Upgrade #Scanning of books to a level-2 section
Remove section header Page numbering
Combine #Errors, #Accuracy, #Language issues into a single section #Criticism or some other suitable header
Legal matters are legal matters - they are not criticism per se, so change level-3 #Copyright infringement, fair use and related issues to a level-2 section #Legal issues.
Change #Google Books Library Project to #Library partners.
Remove section header Google Books Partner Program - incorporating its content into #Details.
Recast #Timeline to #History, casting off the timeline of libraries joining in the project to the #Library partners.
Expand #Ngram viewer, adding more details and criticism.
Create a section on Status - the present status of the project
[3], also
[4] talks a bit about dwindling pace in 2012 itself.
[Errors] became obvious in a big way in 2014, when Google formed a partnership with bookseller
Barnes & Noble,[1] through which Google made more than a half a million
public domain texts available to Barnes & Noble, to be offered for free on the
Nook Shop. Barnes & Noble customers discovered that many books, especially with scientific equations, were unreadable due to errors in Google's
Optical character recognition process.[2]
I'm sorry, but this hardly seems to be correct. The partnership b/w Google and Nook, per the NYT article used as ref above, is all about sale of print books through Google's shopping service. I am unable to find any info about any partnership b/w Google and B&N regarding ebooks. Also, the Nook support forum used as ref above (not an RS in the first place) is a dead link. Please readd the above info if you can find some concrete,
reliable sources for the same.
223.227.34.151 (
talk)
17:21, 19 December 2017 (UTC)reply
okay,
this makes it clear that there was no partnership as such, but Google provided more than half a million PD books for the Nook store. But again, we need an RS for the criticism part.
223.227.34.151 (
talk)
17:28, 19 December 2017 (UTC)reply
In which library is this book?
When I find a public domain book in Google Books, how can I know in which library it was scanned? In my view Google Books should credit this library even if this library did not do the scanning job. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Coulonnus (
talk •
contribs)
05:54, 18 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Digital preservation disabled by Google
Since October 2019 or less before, Google has disabled anonymous and registered users from saving single pages into
Internet Archive or
archive.is.
Any page which is quoted in a WP article may be put anytime out of the Google preview so as not to be yet a
WP:verifiable source.
This as an irresponsbile initiative of Google, in a special way damaging the WP community against Wikipedia which needs a long-time
digital preservation of the external sources used for WP articles. It also applies to titles published more than a century ago, which fall in the public domain and therefore without any risk of possible copyright infringement.