[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Privacy and the Google settlement (long, sorry)
I'll not go into a close textual reading of either posting.
I'll only say two things: first there were business analogies
given of products libraries offer, and do not make privacy
demands upon. I argue that those are the wrong analogies in the
case of Google, and they slide libraries farther along the
spectrum toward business models. This is not necessarily good,
and there are still differences between nonprofits and for
profits.
Second, words like "seismic" used to describe changes that "are"
coming, and soon don't help. There are so many assumptions
larded into the second post, and they tend to be asserted, to
reinforce one another. Technological change has a long history,
and it tends, like history itself, to be cumulative, not sudden
and "seismic" (railroads are still around & even making something
of a comeback).
The Google project faces a very, very large hurdle in the form of
copyright, and that will not happen quickly. Libraries all over
are grappling with the gap between the potential of technology
and the various restrictions on those potentials within copyright
and various laws. Google can't wave a magic wand and make all
those go away. These postings sound more like the rhetoric of a
Wired article than the kind of calm analysis claimed. Oh, and
thanks to Linda Hopkins for the post on privacy - an integral
part of libraries' "brand" (to use a current business term of
art).
John Buschman
Rick Anderson wrote:
> On 7/28/09 5:50 PM, "John Buschman" <jeb224@georgetown.edu> wrote:
> I take exception to a number of assumptions here...
>
> John's response to my posting seems, in significant part, to be
> a response to someone else -- someone who has argued that
> Google should be invited to ....