The writers' groups are on the wrong side of this issue. The facts are simple: excerpts sell books. Excerpts get people reading. Excerpts spread knowledge, and help readers find the books they want.

I wonder how much of this is motivated by concerns about intellectual property rights and profits, and how much is motivated by concerns about the "wrong kinds of books" being digitized and made available, in some limited form, to Chinese readers. I wonder what percentage of Chinese authors are in agreement with the writers' associations on this. I wish we had the funding to do a survey.

cindy carter, November 1, 2009, 4:30p.m.

I learned of this dispute when the host of CRI's 老外看点 Laowai kandian brought in the Chinese news report to serve as a discussion topic. Reading the public statements of the Writer's Assoc, my first reaction was negative-it sounded like pumped-up antagonism against yet another form of Western imperialism. Yet, one step farther back, and I'm not so sure.

First, I have to concede that a part of my opposition to Google's digitization program is visceral, not rational; having grown up with books in hand, in a family that believed in literature and in books (the two being nominally different), I tend to view digitization as multifariously harmful. And a rational argument there isn't impossible to make.

But to be real, Google's digitization program commits offenses on two levels. They buy (or rent) books, scan them back to front, then once the corpus is cocked and in the chamber-with an excerpt already available online-they go back to the author to buy permission to fire. And how much? 60 dollars per book plus 63% of online book-site ad revenue-in short, peanuts. Their decision to ask forgiveness instead of seeking permission is motivated by corporate arrogance, which dictates that their name, their payroll and their price per share created such inertia that no poor writer will have the time or the money necessary to sue them, and their utter lack of respect for the writer is the first level of offense. The second level is legal; they are obeying the letter of copyright law without the spirit. The former is defined by statute, the second by precedent; unfortunately, precedent is the sum of money and time in court, which most writers do not have.

Excerpts definitely sell books, if the original is not available in its entirety online. Five years ago, 99 out of 100 interested viewers of an excerpt would have gone and bought the book; now, as Kindles are selling like hotcakes and one form of traditional media, newspapers, are losing to their own online incarnations, that number is much less. If you don't believe me, take a few rides on the T (Boston's metro) and see what people have in their hands.

Imagine that one hundred thousand people read the online version of a book that you, the author, have been paid sixty bucks for-almost after the fact. Who's losing?

Canaan Morse, November 2, 2009, 3:01a.m.

This was illuminating, Canaan. It's the numbers that are disturbing here, not the motivation behind the project. Digitization spreads knowledge, makes more books available, and is a noble endeavor. But if authors and publishers aren't being compensated fairly for their work, it becomes exploitative. Those critical of this project raise some important issues.

I need to learn more about this.

cindy carter, November 2, 2009, 10:21p.m.

If you by a paper book from Amazon, will the writer get more money than if you by it for your Kindle from Amazon?

Anna Chen, November 3, 2009, 7:02p.m.

rayban sunglasses are some of the many iconic companies inside of the eyeglasses field coupled with favored for his / her timelessly exquisite sunglasses in which never don't peek rapidly attractive greater than the feeling occurrence. The manufacturer also is the choice of a large number of babes along with styles tokens plus the multiple versions are generally continuously designing shows available at hot months movies fests and introduction proceedings.ray ban 2113 sale

xhjasonwx7, May 5, 2012, 1:15p.m.