|
||||
|
||||
Why the Google Books Settlement is Procompetitive
Einer Elhauge Harvard University - Harvard Law School September 2, 2009 Harvard Law and Economics Discussion Paper No. 646 Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 09-45 Abstract: Although the Google Books Settlement has been criticized as anticompetitive, I conclude that this critique is mistaken. For out-of copyright books, the settlement procompetitively expands output by clarifying which books are in the public domain and making them digitally available for free. For claimed in-copyright books, the settlement procompetitively expands output by clarifying who holds their rights, making them digitally searchable, allowing individual digital display and sales at competitive prices each rightsholder can set, and creating a new subscription product that provides digital access to a near-universal library at free or competitive rates. For unclaimed incopyright books, the settlement procompetitively expands output by helping to identify rightsholders and making their books saleable at competitive rates when they cannot be found. The settlement does not raise rival barriers to offering any of these books, but to the contrary lowers them. The output expansion is particularly dramatic for out-of-print books, for which there is currently no new output at all.
Keywords: Google, books, Google Books, Google Books Settlement, copyright, digital books, cartel, monopoly, monopolization, orphan books, out-of-copyright, out-of-print, entry barriers, restraints of trade, Internet, antitrust JEL Classifications: K21, L12, L4, L41, L42, L49 Working Paper SeriesDate posted: August 23, 2009 ; Last revised: October 19, 2009Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||
© 2009 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use Privacy Policy
This page was served by apollo3 in 0.156 seconds.