This is pretty amazing.
As some of you know, I am one of the objectors to the class action settlement reached by ASJA, NWU and the Authors Guild with Reed Elsevier and other databases and periodicals publishers. There, as in the Google case, large corporations had infringed the copyrights of a huge number of writers.
My objection in that earlier case was simple and mirrors the reasons I’ve protested the Google settlement. The writers’ organizations — ASJA, the Authors Guild and NWU — agreed to hand over, to the Defendants, the future rights of anyone who didn’t file a claim or opt out.
Defendants also got the only thing they should have been given, what Defendants normally get in a settlement: release of the claims of past wrongdoing.
I objected to the theft of the rights of absent class members, first to the leadership of ASJA and then, when I could not get them to budge, to the court.
Fast forward to yesterday, and ASJA as well as NWU (as part of a group called the Bloom objectors) have filed an objection to the Google settlement.
Their key argument?
“… after approval, Rightsholders will be deemed to have granted a license by virtue of doing nothing.”
In other words, ASJA and NWU, both of which once agreed to give away, to Defendants in the earlier class action, the future rights of periodicals writers who fail to opt out or file claims, now object to giving away the future rights of book authors who fail to opt out or file claims.
ASJA’s aggressive support for what I saw as theft in the Freelance settlement is the primary reason I resigned from that organization. That was no small thing for me. I’d been a very active volunteer on the First Amendment and other committees, and had served on the board.
I’m glad to see that ASJA, under the new leadership of Salley Shannon, finally appears to understand that it’s unethical to bargain away the rights of some writers in exchange for better terms for the writers you represent.
Better late than never.
– Anita Bartholomew