Gougol et le futur du numérique

Gougol et les éditeurs, la suite d'un débat inépuisable...

Robert Darnton Google and the New Digital Future (NYB 18/11/2009). version intégrale : ttp://www.nybooks.com/articles/23518 ou version abrégée :-):-) ( 9000 signes sur 20 000).

Robert Darnton analyse les arguments échangés par Google, ses partenaires et ses adversaires devant le juge Denny Chin le vendredi 13 novembre dernier.

Les enjeux économiques et culturels sont énormes. Le lecture de l'article incite à souligner l'écart entre les discours et les pratiques, entre les arguments avancés et les intérêts financiers réels : qui invoque, face à Google, la déclaration des droits de l'homme (1789) ? Qui soutient que "le livre n'est pas une marchandise comme les autres" ? Qui se soucie des dangers du fichage électronique ? Qui prétend se battre pour le respect de la vie privée (avec ses caméras ?) ? Quels grands noms trouve-t-on dans une « Open Book Alliance » ?

RD plaide en faveur d'une Grande Bibliothèque numérique, accessible à tous et gratuite.
Il envisage deux réponses aux problèmes posés par la numérisation, une maximale, une minimale :

« The most ambitious solution would transform Google's digital database into a truly public library. That, of course, would require an act of Congress, one that would make a decisive break with the American habit of determining public issues by private lawsuit. The legislation would have to settle ancillary problems—how to adjust copyright, deal with orphan books, and compensate Google for its investment in digitizing—but it would have the advantage of clearing up a messy legal landscape and of giving the American people what they deserve: a national digital library equal to the needs of the twenty-first century. But it is not clear how Google would react to such a buyout. »

« If state intervention is deemed to go too far against the American grain, a minimal solution could be devised for the private sector. Congress would have to intervene with legislation to protect the digitization of orphan works from lawsuits, but it would not need to appropriate funds. Instead, funding could come from a coalition of foundations. The digitizing, open-access distribution, and preservation of orphan works could be done by a nonprofit organization such as the Internet Archive, a nonprofit group that was built as a digital library of texts, images, and archived Web pages. In order to avoid conflict with interests in the current commercial market, the database would include only books in the public domain and orphan works. Its time span would increase as copyrights expired, and it could include an opt-in provision for rightsholders of books that are in copyright but out of print. »

rappel : Robert Darnton, Google & the Future of Books (12/02/2009)
            La BNF et Gougol 1 ou La BNF et Gougol 2