So then ask yourself if she applies this kind of logic and reason to this specific scenario, how good can the content of her books be?

Would I read them? No! Simply because there just has to be something flawed about some of the concepts contained within, or maybe even with the major themes.

If I restricted myself to the works of writers who actually understood how infinite-goods economics work, I’d run out of books in quite a hurry. You’re just going to have to learn to live with this sort of thing, I’m afraid.

Oh, the irony that someone who could write such a classic novel about a world with no concept of private property or central government (or any mention of copyright or other “intellectual property” at all), could harbour such a half-arsed attitude to real-life society.

I, too, used to be a fan (though of her science-fiction stuff, not her fantasy stuff). But now I’m having second thoughts…

You people have no clue.

I’m really confused by all this. Ms. LeGuin’s letter outlined a number of reasons that she was dissatisfied with the Author’s Guild, so it doesn’t seem like she just freaked out. While I’m sure she feels very strongly about copyright issues and the Google settlement, there’s nothing in what I’ve read here that shows that she’s somehow opposed to all sharing, discussing, mentioning, or quoting of her works.
She did not really call Google the devil. “Deal with the devil” is just an expression, for heaven’s sake.
Also, she’s awesome. I’m sad for those of you who are rejecting her out of hand over this one issue.

“A few years ago, she got into a bit of a scrap with Cory Doctorow, because he dared to publish a single paragraph of hers in a blogpost as part of a larger (positive!) commentary.”

In fact the “single paragraph” was a complete copy of an entire paragraph-long published story.

The Google/Author’s Guild Settlement completely sidesteps the issue of whether scanning a complete book to display “snippets” is fair use. Instead, the Settlement is an ongoing publishing contract that gives Google broad publication and sales powers that last for the entire copyright term.

This means the Author’s Guild’s reply to Ursula LeGuin is bogus. Yes, the AG _might_ have lost the “snippet” suit in court. No lawsuit is a sure thing. However, if the AG had _won_ their original suit–or at the very least hammered out in court a harmless-to-copyright-holders definition of “snippet”–that precedent _would_ have protected copyright holders. Since the AG set no precedent, any and every other party that wants to scan entire books to display “snippets” is still free to do so and wait for someone to sue _them_.

In short, the Author’s Guild has protected no copyrights at all. They’ve just given Google a huge grant of rights owned by numerous copyright holders with no connection to either the Author’s Guild or Google, and which, contrary to Google’s PR, are by no means all out-of-print or so-called orphan works.

It takes an author anywhere from one to several years of full-time work to research and write a book. It takes several tens of thousands of dollars–at the very least–to publish a book. Much of that money is spent on such tasks as editing, indexing, fact checking, book design, cover design, illustration, and other things, such as translations from foreign languages, that still have to be done even if the book is an e-book. Numerous employees and freelancers work on the book in addition to the author. The publisher has considerable overhead–offices, computer equipment, accounting services, etc.–that exists regardless of book format.

The author, the freelancers, the publishers’ employees, etc., all have to pay for housing and groceries just like you do. These are professions: People learn professional skills, do full-time professional work, and need to get paid for it. Often they are not that well paid, but they cannot afford to work for free. It is unfair to expect numerous people to give away all their work to you, while you get paid for your own professional work.

The Google Settlement is NOT about legally approving the current Google Book Search. It is a 300+ page publishing contract negotiated by a handful of parties on behalf of millions of copyright holders who have no connection with the suit and no power to modify the contract. The Settlement applies to all works published in most English-language countries before January 2009, regardless of their in-print status and regardless of the locatability of the copyright holders. It makes Google the publisher of entire books, as both e-books, and print-on-demand books, and sets Google up as both a bookstore and a wholesaler to sell rights to third parties. It also gives Google the right to sell ads next to the book pages, and none of the ad revenues go to the copyright holders. The other terms are also far inferior to most publishing contracts.

Essentially, Google has claimed publication rights for almost every book published in the English language. This is not an altruistic act, and copyright holders have every reason to object to it.

She is an older woman with older values from another generation. Nothing wrong with that. But I think (doubt she will ever read this) she could/would benefit from studying some of the musicians who have learned to use the free download thing to their advantage, even in a world of file sharing and bittorrenting… it can be turned to your advantage. — But it seems she is, like many her age, set in her ways, and seems to think she has it “all figured out”,,, what she doesn’t realized is that the world has changed and even though copyright laws do exist and still do protect you in some ways, there is no way in hell to battle the file sharers or bittorrent crowd. The thing to do is learn to use it to your advantage. — It is a strange irony to see a writer of fantasy dimensions and science fiction technologies to put up such a tantrum about real world technological advances she doesn’t evidently understand how to use to her advantage…