ETHICAL, SOCIAL, AND POLITICAL

ISSUESE-COMMERCE

PRESENTED BYGROUP 5

คุ�ณลอกเลคุเชอร์ของเพื่��อนบ่�อยมั้��ย?| ไม่�ลอกหรอก เอาม่า XEROX ดี กว่�า | แหม่ ก�ม่ บ้�าง เม่�าท์�เพล�นเลยจดีไม่�ท์�น

| จดีเองดี ท์ �สุ�ดี

คุ�ณร์� �มั้� �ย ตอนน��ซี�ดี�เพื่ลงไทย แผ่�นละเท�าไหร์�?| ร��สุ� ก�ราคา บ้าท์

| ไม่�เคยร��นานแล�ว่ | เขาโหลดีของฟร ก�นท์�$งน�$น

เวลาน��งท&างานอย��หน�าคุอมั้ ท&าอะไร์ก�นบ่�าง?| ก�ต้�องท์&างานสุ�

| ท์&าท์�กอย�างแหละ ก�รายงาน (ป.โท์) ม่�นเยอะ

| ปล�กผั�ก เล $ยงปลา ก�งานนะ

คุ�ณไดี�ร์�บ่เมั้ลคุล'ปแอบ่ถ่�ายดีาร์าสาว ส'�งท��คุ�ณท&าคุ�อ?| ร บ้เป*ดีดี� แล�ว่สุ�งต้�อ | ดี�เสุร�จ ลบ้เลย

| ไม่�ดี�หรอก ลบ้ท์�$งเลย

ถ่�าว'ชาน��ไมั้�แจก TEXTBOOK จะท&าอย�างไร์?| ไปซื้,$อสุ�

| เอาไป XEROX สุ�จ-ะ | XEROX ของเพ,�อนท์ �จดีเอาไว่�แล�ว่ ดี ท์ �สุ�ดี

ETHICAL, SOCIAL, AND POLITICAL ISSUES IN E-COMMERCE PRESENTED BY GROUP 5

PRINT THE LIBRARY (ONLINE)IS PLAYING FAIR, OR JUST OUT TO

MAKE A BUCK?

• PROVIDE ACCESS TO “ALL THE WORLD’S INFORMATION”

• MAKE MONEY BY SELLING ADS

• THE PROBLEM ARISES WHEN WHAT GOOGLE PUT IN THEIR SEVERS DOES NOT BELONG TO THEM

BOOK SEARCH PROJECT

(PREVIOUSLY CALLED GOOGLE PRINT)1. THE PARTNER PROGRAM (PREVIOUSLY CALLED THE

PUBLISHER PROGRAM)

– OBTAIN PERMISSION FROM PUBLISHERS TO SCAN THEIR BOOKS AND PROVIDE BIBLIOGRAPHIC

– BENEFIT• PUBLISHERS & AUTHORS : GET CHANCE FOR

WIDER MARKET• GOOGLE : SELL MORE ADS

* NO PROBLEM FOR THIS PART

BOOK SEARCH PROJECT

(PREVIOUSLY CALLED GOOGLE PRINT)2. THE LIBRARY PROJECT (PREVIOUSLY CALLED

GOOGLE PRINT LIBRARY)– SCAN MILLIONS OF BOOKS IN UNIVERSITY

AND PUBLIC LIBRARIES– ALLOW USERS TO SEARCH FOR KEY

PHASE, AND DISPLAY “RELEVANT” PORTION OF THE TEXT CALLS “SNIPPETS”

– WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM PUBLISHERS

THE LIBRARY PROJECT

• SUPPORT BY PRESTIGIOUS LIBRARIES: U. OF MICHIGAN, HARVARD U., STAMFORD U., THE NEW YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY AND OXFORD U.

• REFUSE TO PARTICIPATE: THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTE, THE BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY AND A CONSORTIUM OF 19 RESEARCH AND ACADEMIC LIBRARIES IN THE NORTHEAST

WHY DISAGREE?– HARMFUL TO AUTHORS AND PUBLISHERS– RESTRICTIONS THAT GOOGLE WANTS TO

PLACE ON THEIR COLLECTION, UNAVAILABLE TO OTHER SEARCH SERVICES

CONTROVERSIAL

TWO LAWSUITS CLAIMED “COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT”

– BY THE AUTHORS GUILD

– BY FIVE MAJOR PUBLISHING COMPANIES (MCGRAW HILL, PEARSON EDUCATION, PENGUIN GROUP, SIMON & SCHUSTER, AND JOHN WILEY & SONS)

CONTROVERSIAL

• AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PUBLISHERS ALLEGES:– GOOGLE KEEP TALKING ABOUT DOING THIS

BECAUSE IT IS GOOD FOR THE WORLD. THAT HAS NEVER BEEN A PRINCIPLE IN LAW

• GOOGLE CLAIMS:– PERFORM A PUBLIC SERVICE, AVAILABLE TO

MILLIONS ON THE INTERNET– HELP PUBLISHER SELLING NEW COPIES OF

BOOKS– THIS USE IS “FAIR” UNDER THE “FAIR USE”

DOCTRINE. IT IS CODIFIED IN THE COPYRIGHT ACT IN 1976

TWO DIFFERENT OUTCOMES OF COPYRIGHT LAWSUIT

1. IN NEW YORK, THE UMG RECORDING & MP3 CASECOPIED COPYRIGHTED WORKS ONTO A SERVER AND ALLOWED ACCESS TO THIRD-PARTY SUBSCRIBERS WAS NOT PROTECTED BY FAIR USE

2. IN CALIFORNIA, TWO NINTH CIRCUIT CASES, KELLY & ARRIBA SOFT, AND PERFECT 10, INC & AMAZON.COM INS.THE STORAGE AND DISPLAY OF “THUMBNAIL” IMAGES OF COPYRIGHT WORKS IN ORDER TO MAKE THEM ACCESSIBLE VIA A SEARCH ENGINE WAS FAIR USE

OTHER BOOK SEARCH PROJECTS

1. MICROSOFT : “MICROSOFT LIVE BOOKS SEARCH”

– LAUNCHED IN 2006– SCAN BOOKS WITH PERMISSION FROM

PUBLISHERS– SCAN 750,000 BOOKS AND 80 MILLION

ACADEMIC ARTICLES– CLOSED THE PROJECT DOWN IN MAY 2008

2. THE OPEN CONTENT ALLIANCE (OCA)– OPEN DATABASE OF BOOK CONTENTS THAT

WILL BE ACCESSIBLE FROM ANY SEARCH ENGINE

– FOCUS ON BOOKS IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN, OFTEN HISTORICAL INTEREST

– OBTAIN PERMISSION FROM PUBLISHERS BEFORE SCANNING

CASE STUDY QUESTIONSPLEASE OPEN YOUR TEXTBOOK TO PAGE 8-63

1WHO IS HARMED BY GOOGLE’S LIBRARY PROJECT?

MAKE A LIST OF HARMED GROUPS.

A N S W E RPUBLISHING COMPANY PUBLIC CAN

ACCESS FOR FREE OF CHARGE.AUTHORS OF THE BOOK THE COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.

1FOR EACH GROUP, TRY TO DEVISE A SOLUTION THAT WOULD ELIMINATE OR

LESSEN THE HARM.

A N S W E RBOTH PUBLISHER AND AUTHOR

• MUTUAL AGREEMENT OF BUSINESS MODEL

• GIVE MONETARY COMPENSATION

2IF YOU WERE A LIBRARIAN, WOULD YOU SUPPORT GOOGLE’S LIBRARY PROJECT?

WHY OR WHY NOT?

A N S W E R“SUPPORT” IN CONCEPT FREE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION IS SIMILAR MODEL TO A PUBLIC LIBRARY

“THREAT” IN SUBSTITUTE SERVICE GOOGLE’S LIBRARY HAS A COMPETITIVE EDGE OVER A PHYSICAL LIBRARY

3DO YOU BELIEVE GOOGLE’S CLAIM THAT SCANNING ENTIRE BOOKS FITS WITHIN

THE CONCEPT OF “FAIR USE”?WHY OR WHY NOT?

A N S W E R“NO”

CHARACTER OF USE

NATURE OF THE WORK

AMOUNT OF WORK USED

MARKET EFFECT OF USE

CONTEXT OF USE

1. FACTOR OF FAIR USE

2. FAIR USE: NOT EXCLUSIVE SEARCH

ENGINE

4WHAT ARE SOME OF THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GOOGLE’S

LIBRARY PROJECT PROGRAM AND THE OPEN CONTENT ALLIANCE PROGRAM?

A N S W E R“GOOGLE”

COMMERCIAL EXCLUSIVE

WITH/WITHOUT PERMISSION

“OCA”NON-COMMERCIAL

BE ACCESSIBLE FROM ANY SEARCH ENGINE

PUBLISHER AGREEMENT

5WHY IS GOOGLE PURSUING THE LIBRARY PROJECT PROGRAM? WHAT IS IN IT FOR

GOOGLE?MAKE A LIST OF BENEFITS TO GOOGLE.

A N S W E RHORIZONTAL INTEGRATION

INCREASE GOOGLE PAGE VIEW, DECREASE OTHER SEARCH ENGINE PAGE VIEW

MORE BENEFIT OPPORTUNITYINCREASE BARGAINING POWER

ETHICAL, SOCIAL, AND POLITICAL ISSUES IN E-COMMERCE PRESENTED BY GROUP 5

แอบ่เอาร์�ปคุนอ��นจากในเน-ตมั้าล�อเล�นโดียเจ�าต�วไมั้�ร์� �ถ่�อว�าผ่'ดีมั้��ย?

| ผั�ดี เพราะไม่�ให�เจ�าต้�ว่เล,อกร�ปสุว่ยๆ | ไม่�ผั�ดี แกล�งก�นข&าๆในห�องเร ยน

เล�าเร์�ยนส&าเร์-จว'ทยา ก-ย�อมั้ไดี�เก�ยร์ต' แต�ฝึ0กอบ่ร์มั้ดี�วยจร์'ยธร์ร์มั้แล�วต�างหาก จ2งจะสบ่

ส�นต'ส�ขGROUP 5: NOK AOZZ COOK EIGHT and OH