GoogleLibrary Is Great for the World

Let's face it: A big reason publishers are so upset about Google's plans to digitize tens of millions of library books is because they fear the Google guys are stealing their future. Google has figured out how to make buckets of money off the Internet. Most publishers haven't.

Just look at the numbers that came out of the Googleplex last week. Revenue for the quarter was nearly double a year earlier. Earnings, up seven times. Meanwhile, the people who make the stuff Google searches are struggling to hold their own.

There was a time when folks thought compelling content would be king of the Internet. Attract enough "eyeballs," the gurus said, and money would follow. But instead, Google's blank home page has trumped all. The Google economy is a kind of high-tech feudal system: The peasants produce the content; Google makes the profits.

That's all the more annoying to the content crowd because the lords of this money machine -- Sergey Brin and Larry Page -- perpetuate the goofy-sounding notion that they do all this to help the world, rather than line their own pockets.

"That's true," Mr. Brin said in an interview yesterday. "We talked at Stanford for a while about making Google an open-source project. We ultimately decided that would not be an efficient way for us to get the resources we needed to make it run. So we started a company."

As for the Google Print Library Project, Mr. Brin says, "We actually dreamed of the ability to do this back before we started Google as a company." It is good for Google's users, good for the business, it's fair and it's legal, he says. "But more importantly, I think it is really great for the world."

The publishers may find Mr. Brin annoying. And he certainly is successful and rich. But he also happens to be right. The Google Print Library Project is great for the world.

Imagine, for instance, that you want to find out everything ever written about your great-great granduncle, who fought in the Civil War. If he is mentioned in an older book not covered by copyright, Google provides instant access to the entire book. If he is mentioned in a book still covered by copyright, Google provides what Mr. Brin calls a "snippet" that includes the mention, and then offers links to publishers, booksellers, used bookstores or libraries that can provide the full book.

That's not only good for the world; it is also good for most publishers and authors. It is unlikely to cause anyone not to buy a book they were otherwise planning to buy. And it could lead many to buy books they never knew existed.

Still, Pat Schroeder, the former congresswoman who heads the American Association of Publishers, isn't happy. "Publishers have a noble purpose too," she sniffs. Even if Google's plan is good for authors and publishers, the copyright owner ought to decide -- not Google. "This is one of the biggest for-profit companies on the planet. And their business model is basically taking everybody's stuff without pay. They need to come up with a model that pays the creators something, because if all of us went away, that would be the end of the game. There wouldn't be anything to search," she says.

Moralistic language aside, this isn't a battle between David and Goliath, or a fight between good and evil. It is a business negotiation -- a fight over the spoils that come from a new-fashioned way of using old-fashioned material.

Google and the publishers had long and serious talks in an effort to try to reach a negotiated agreement on their own. Both Mr. Brin and Ms. Schroeder thought they were getting close. But the talks broke down because Google wanted a system in which copyrighted books were included unless the copyright holders opted out; the AAP wanted one in which the books were excluded unless the copyright holder raised his hand to be included.

So now the AAP has filed suit, and it will be up to the courts to decide who has the law on their side. Google's defenders insist the "snippets" approach is no different than a library card catalog and constitutes a "fair use" allowed under U.S. law. Google's detractors say that by making a complete digital copy of the book, even if the entire book isn't available for reading or downloading, the company is violating copyright law.

But here's the key: Either way, the project will continue. Indeed, the project is continuing in Europe, which has a different legal system that clearly requires Google to get permission from copyright owners. And once the courts have ruled, if not before, Google and the publishers will find a way to make it work here.

One way or another, the Google Print Library will get built. The world will be better off. And someone will make some money in the process.

Write to Alan Murray at business@wsj.com. If you want to share your thoughts but don't want your letter published, please make that clear. Alan will share readers' comments and reply in Saturday's Talking Business column.