James Gleick on the future of books

The great science writer James Gleick writes in today’s NYT about the future of books:

As a technology, the book is like a hammer. That is to say, it is perfect: a tool ideally suited to its task. Hammers can be tweaked and varied but will never go obsolete. Even when builders pound nails by the thousand with pneumatic nail guns, every household needs a hammer. Likewise, the bicycle is alive and well. It was invented in a world without automobiles, and for speed and range it was quickly surpassed by motorcycles and all kinds of powered scooters. But there is nothing quaint about bicycles. They outsell cars.

The op-ed is a thoughtful take on the future of books, including the significance of the recent settlement of the Google Book Search litigation, in which Gleick played a role as a negotiator for the authors.

Google Book Search settlement

Here’s an excerpt from today’s press release:

The Authors Guild, the Association of American Publishers (AAP), and Google today announced a groundbreaking settlement agreement on behalf of a broad class of authors and publishers worldwide that would expand online access to millions of in-copyright books and other written materials in the U.S. from the collections of a number of major U.S. libraries participating in Google Book Search. The agreement, reached after two years of negotiations, would resolve a class-action lawsuit brought by book authors and the Authors Guild, as well as a separate lawsuit filed by five large publishers as representatives of the AAP’s membership. The class action is subject to approval by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Info on the settlement here and here.

New York Times and 148-year copyrights

In conjunction with its endorsement of Senator Obama for President, today’s New York Times website has a great graphic illustrating its endorsements since 1860, alongside the winners for each year.  For example, in 1888, the Times endorsed Grover Cleveland, who was defeated by Benjamin Harrison.  Four years later, the Times again endorsed Cleveland, who won.  The graphic also allows you to pull up the original published endorsements.  Here’s an excerpt from the Times’ 1860 endorsement of Abraham Lincoln:

As a historical document, this is fascinating.  But note the claim of copyright at the bottom, asserting copyright to something published in 1860.  Say what!?  The Times needs to read copyright laws a little more closely before asserting copyright to an editorial published 148 years ago.  Even with Congress’ expansion of copyright terms, an editorial published in 1860 is not still copyrighted.  (For more “recent” examples, see Lincoln’s 1864 endorsement, Grant’s 1868 endorsement, etc., also containing copyright notices).