A Tale of Two Scrolls

(This article was originally published in the Technology Supplement of the Sunday Times of Malta in January 2010)

From a piece of writing material made of papyrus, the term 'scroll' has taken a whole new meaning with the advent of graphical user interfaces and the computer mouse. Technology did not only introduce new meanings to words, it also drastically changed the way in which books (the modern version of scrolls) are perceived and the way in which society and the law react to the digitization phenomenon.

The Great Library of Alexandria was the first attempt in recorded history to amass a huge collection of writings that went beyond the geographical borders of its host nation. Started by Ptolemy the First around the third century B.C., the library became the centre of scientific and scholarly research for many centuries, making it the largest repository of human knowledge in the world. Back then, the concept of a book was different than our present day understanding. Papyrus scrolls were the order of the day. A 'book' could therefore span various scrolls and so acute was the Great Library of Alexandria's demand for papyrus that it left little for export and lead other civilizations to develop parchment codices, the early ancestors of the book.

Fast forward to the year 2004 A.D. and the launch of the Google Books service with which the online giant is scanning and storing the full text of millions of books in its digital library database. This service allows users to download works which are in the public domain as well as out-of-print books. Google have enrolled various universities as well as publishing houses in its program in order to digitize as many works as possible. With currently over 10 million scanned books in its library, Google has not been immune from the reaches of copyright law albeit its statements that it is democratizing knowledge. Whilst legal problems may not be so acute in relation to books in the public domain (i.e. works that do not fall under copyright protection because their copyright has expired) the situation is not as clear with respect to out-of-print books, especially in Europe.

The European Commission stated without equivocal terms last September that the digitization of books is a challenging subject that would be very beneficial to European citizens but that should also respect copyright rules and ensure fair remuneration to authors. Easier said than done.

Europe's copyright legislation with respect to digitized works is still very fragmented especially in relation to orphan (author unknown) and out-of-print works. It is true that Google's attempts to bring back to life out-of-print books to a digital audience is laudable but one needs to ensure that the authors of such works are properly remunerated. Unlike the U.S., the present legal regimes in Europe dictate that all Member States manage separately their own indigenous works which makes any Europe-wide attempt at digitizing books full of legal hurdles.

Many are now questioning the applicability of copyright laws which do not include in detail any provisions relating to the digitization of literary works. Multiply this problem by twenty seven and you will start to understand the magnitude of the issue from an EU wide perspective.

Last December a French court ordered Google that it cannot digitize French books without the approval of the publishers ruling that the scanning of entire books where a breach of copyright to the detriment of the plaintiffs being some French publishing houses including Les Editions du Sueil. Does this make France at the back of the "Internet queue" as one of Google's lawyers claimed? Whilst ordering Google to pay 300,000 Euros in damages, the court drew attention to the fact that under French law, digitising a book is tantamount to the reproduction of that work and therefore falls under copyright protection and can only be done with the approval of the author or the copyright holder.

Next month, an American court will be ruling on the legality of an arrangement which Google reached with a number of US publishers and authors following a 2005 class action filed against Google that will allow further millions of books to be digitized and a revenue sharing arrangement with which authors could receive up to 63% of the online revenue generated by Google with digitized books.

Many, including Google's top rivals such as Yahoo and Microsoft claim that Google Books will create a monopoly for the access of digital works and they may not be that wrong even though Google claims that the project was not driven by profit. Under the present version of the settlement, however, millions of books will not be made available to European consumers since they are considered as 'foreign books' or books covered by copyright laws in a European jurisdiction even though works registered in the UK, Canada and Australia will be included.

Back in Egypt, every ship that entered Alexandria would have had its books copied by the Library in order to daily increase its registry. Whilst present book digitization attempts will surely enable to keep an electronic record of our literary heritage for posterity, a more unified effort is required in order to ensure that copyright rules affecting digitized literary works do not serve as an obstacle but as a facilitator to the creation of an online corpus of human knowledge.