Google wants to own your library

Google's attempt to become the single most important repository of all the world's information -- including that locked up in the world's best libraries -- received a major setback recently, when a New England consortium of libraries rebuffed Google entreaties, and instead signed with an open source group, who vow to make the information freely available to anyone, anywhere.

For over a year, Google has pursued a controversial plan to scan the contents of many of the world's biggest libraries -- including those of Harvard, Princeton, and Oxford's -- and make the content available on Google.

At first blush, it sounds like a fine idea. After all, it will allow anyone using the Internet to get access to a vast treasure trove of materials that was previously locked up in four walls. Here's the rub, though: those books will only be available via Google, and in no other way. In fact, the agreement between Google and libraries prohibit making the material available to any commercial search site.

Many people worry that handing over such precious intellectual property to a single, commercial venture, is dangerous. Instead, it should be available freely however people would like to access it, not just from a single site.

So instead, many libraries are turning to the Open Content Alliance, a non-profit group that will scan in books, and make them available to any site. Already, more than 80 libraries and research institutions have signed up, including the Boston Public Library and the Smithsonian Institution.

Bernard A. Margolis, president of the Boston Public Library, summed up what many librarians feel when he told the New York Times, "We understand the commercial value of what Google is doing, but we want to be able to distribute materials in a way where everyone benefits from it."

It's not clear, though, that the Open Content Alliance will win out over Google. Google scans the books for free. The Open Content Alliance, without the backing of a multi-billion dollar parent, has to charge libraries $30 a book.

Paul Duguid, an adjunct professor at the School of Information at the University of California, Berkeley, told the New York Times, "There are two opposed pathways being mapped out. One is shaped by commercial concerns, the other by a commitment to openness, and which one will win is not clear."

My worry is that money talks. Libraries are already strapped for cash. Having to find funding and grants is tough; it's far easier to simply sign on with Google.

The answer is simple: Google should end its restrictive contracts with the libraries, and make the materials available in the same way the Open Content Alliance has. After all, Google beat out the competition to become the world's best search engine not because it had content no one else had, but because the company made it far easier to find that information. They should follow the same plan now, and we'd all benefit, not just Google stockholders.