I don't know if you've tried Google Books yet, but it is yet another web based resource who's time has come, in two ways. Google Books allows users to search for a particular book and to view excerpts from said book. It's a great "try before you buy" type of resource, a digital library or bookstore that allows one to browse a bit before making their purchase. It also makes find a book on an obscure subject far easier. But Microsoft has a problem.

Microsoft exec. Tom Rubin (not to be confused with Paul Rubins, the guy who played Pee-Wee Herman) hopped onto a soap box before the American Association of Publishers to endorse the AAP law suit against Google over their search engines seemingly blatant disregard for copyright law. Hmmm, wasn't Microsoft just sued for $1.52 billion (that's billion Doctor Evil) by Alcatel-Lucent for copyright infringement?

Rubin is accusing Google (Books) of taking a unilateral approach to copyright law. It's the digitization of books that Microsoft has a problem with. But Microsoft is doing the same thing for the British Library.

Certainly, every copyright holder should be paid fair due for their intellectual works, regardless of the type of work or the format it may be presented in. But Microsoft's' claim and or implication of copyright infringement is a little far fetched. I've gone to the library before (that big building full of books where everyone is really quite and usually reading something) and photocopied excerpts from books for use in school or at home. Case in point; I fix cars for people on occasion and may have to reference a specific car manual for some engine specs. I could use my library card and check-out that book I need, but I am allowed to photocopy a portion for my own personal use providing I do not redistribute it without the copyright holders express and granted permission.

And that's where thing get grey. Google is scanning books without notification to the original copyright holders. If a copyright holder finds their work(s) on Google Books, they can then contact Google and opt-out of having their work(s) included in the Google Books data base. But Google never asked them if they would like to opt-in in the first place. That's where copyright law gets involved. 

This isn't to say that Microsoft is the villain here. Rubin has claimed that Microsoft "seeks to collaborate with copyright holders in developing technologies and business models that not only build a competitive and varied marketplace of online book content, but at the same time nurture the incentives for creativity reflected in copyright law without which no artist or writer – and no society that aspires to a living culture – can thrive".

The same can be said for Googles YouTube. Movie and television companies are concerned that their works are being infringed upon when uploaded to YouTube. Google may not make that initial concerted effort to protect copyrighted materials, but does cooperate with copyright holders when they feel that their works are being infringed upon without due compensation. Rubin also claims: "Google simply denies liability and appears to be trying wherever possible to skirt copyright law's boundaries."

But there are a number of copyright holders working with YouTube.

Coincidentally, Microsoft's own version of YouTube, dubbed Soapbox, went into public beta last month. If Soapbox popularity begins to grow, Microsoft may begin to face the same copyright issues that YouTube has.

Perhaps the United States and other countries around the world should take a page from Canadian copyright practices. here in Canada we have to pay a levy on blank CD's and writable storage media to help compensate music artists for their works. It is (for some odd reason) assumed that people who buy blank CD's are simply using them to burn the MP3s they've downloaded without paying for. There is also some legislation tabled that will see a similar levy placed upon iPods. Maybe there should be a similar levy upon Internet access to compensate copyright holders for their works that can be accessed on-line.

Or maybe everyone should relax a little bit more. Not everyone is a thief.