Dierna;

Can you supply any particulars? Google Books’ original approach was basically ignore the nature of copyright, the rights to reproduction of a work, and just digitise books wholesale. Even allowing for the finer points of copyright law and fair use, this is seems like an utterly reckless strategy in terms of how to approach building a library of content, rather than the slower process of working out business deals with copyright holders. And as a basic standard of legal practice, I can’t say that failing to check and hammer out copyright issues is anything but risible.

Google just tells you the book is out there and points out the links to BUY the book (IE Amazon.com) or lets you see if it’s in a library near you. Heck those same books can also be be viewed on Archive.org, Heritage Quest, and numerous other sites. Google’s not alone.

That said, having access to so much more information and books of all sorts is a great thing about the new technologies.

Of course, I’ve read enough post-apocalyptic science fiction, that I can see potential problems in the lack of hard-copy. I, however, do not think the hard copy book will entirely disappear. The power of the physical object doesn’t disappear, and sometimes a book will be that object. I do think actual hard copy books may become more object d’art in and of themselves, but I don’t find that a bad thing.

What I do see happening even now, though is the divide between the plugged in and the unplugged of society. It’s a new class divide. Look at advertising on television — TV, which is in virtually all homes these days — many of those ads send viewers to websites for further information about the products and deals. But if one does not have an internet connection, let alone a computer, what then? One of my brothers-in-law is pretty much a computer Luddite, which for a lawyer is a pretty bizarre choice of life-style. I don’t know what the answer to this needs to be, but I see the separation present and growing.