Marcus' World

Harsh Alchemy

I'm currently reading Robert Caro's The Power Broker, an edifice of New York City and State history.  It's about the many ways that Robert Moses exercised and abused his power within state government, despite never being elected.

At over 1,000 pages, it is quite long. So far I've read 300 pages.  Caro describes the life of Moses as a "harsh alchemy," which transformed him from a young man of idealistic notions about government into a middle-aged man with no compunction about doing whatever he felt was necessary  to achieve his objectives.  I found the phrase to be poetic and painful, and perhaps an apt description of the journey we all must make through life.

Note to Robert Caro: My apologies for destroying your intellectual labors by the careless theft of the phrase "harsh alchemy."  Send my your address and I'll send you a quarter.

Although I found the book the old-fashioned way--at a physical library--hopefully someday people will find it in Google Book Search, and go to their library or buy it online. That would enrich themselves, Mr. Caro, and his publisher.

Google Book Search Debate Rages

Bill and I have carried on the debate that started here, over on Before.   Look for Bill's posting--which links to the earlier threads of the debate--and then the comments below it. As of now, it's wrapped up. Neither of us changed our minds, but it was a valuable exercise all the same.  However you feel about Google Book Search, these are fascinating times for the evolution of our understanding of copyright.

There's another, more nostalgic reason why the debate has been enjoyable. Bill said it reminded him of our debates at Brookpark Middle School in Grove City, Ohio. Hopefully our arguments are more mature now. But it's nice to see that we're just as passionate as we were then.

Year of the Dog

After a long hiatus, Helen and I have ventured down to Manhattan's Chinatown the past two weekends.  I always use this occasion to obnoxiously declare that Manhattan still has the best Chinatown in the city; a traitor to her borough, Helen prefers the version in Flushing, Queens.

Last week we went to the Museum of the Chinese in the Americas.  One of the exhibits focused on the continuing economic harm to Chinatown after the attacks of September 11, 2001.  For several weeks after the attack downtown  Manhattan was essentially closed to business, and Park Row--which used to be major access point to Chinatown, and connects with police headquarters--remains closed today.  Consequences are severe; a general store that survived more than 100 years, even through the Great Depression, had to close its doors.

In addition to economic turmoil, the neighborhood's demographics are changing. The yuppies are fleeing high-priced Soho and Tribeca, and setting up roots in nearby and more affordable Chinatown.  They usually aren't Chinese, and so neighborhood leaders are banding together to preserve its historic character. 

One result of these efforts are festivals to celebrate the Lunar New Year that are more flashy than ever before. So yesterday we were back in Chinatown, for a live firecracker ceremony. At one point it started to rain, and it appeared that the interminable political speeches would ruin the event.  At least, that's how the woman next to us--who kept shouting, "It's raining!"--felt about the situation. I enjoyed the speeches myself, mostly because I didn't feel so bad for not knowing how to pronounce "Gong hei fat choy."  And the firecrackers all went off, with loud explosions and smoke rings trailing in the distance.  Chinatown's transformation is probably inevitable, but events like these are a good reminder of what will be lost.

Gong hei fat choy. Welcome to the Year of the Dog.

Filibuster Samuel Alito

For most of last year, I was more annoyed than inspired by John Kerry's bellicose rhetoric.  But now that Sam Alito is likely to join the Supreme Court, I support Kerry's call for a filibuster of the nomination  Alito never saw a use of Presidential power that he did not like, and in these times of illegal wiretaps and detentions we must be more vigilant than ever.

If you agree, please sign the filibuster petition today.

Google Book Search Redux

Bill Cash has posted a strong criticism of the legality of the Google Book Search program on Marcus' World.  The critical question is whether the library component of the program--in which leading libraries allow Google to scan all of parts of their collections, in order to feed search results that are small snippets of various books--is a fair use of these materials. The publishers say no, and Google and the libraries say yes.

Fair use, very roughly defined, provides for legitimate exceptions to strict observance of copyright law. It's what allows you to photocopy book pages without buying the book, and arguably to check the book out of the library in the first place (along with the "first sale doctrine," which I discuss below). Let's not forget that libraries would not exist in a perfect world for publishers; everyone would have to buy everything.

Google's commercial potential from this program could indeed mean that it is not a fair use, as Bill argues.  I have been concerned about Google's commercial designs since the program began, and argued in Biomedical Digital Libraries that the library-results pages should be a commerce-free zone.  As of now, Google has promised not to display any advertisements on pages that result from library book searches.

If Google changes course and becomes commercial with the library materials, I would agree with Bill. Until then, I feel that it a red herring for publishers to lament the fact that big bad Google doesn't have the courtesy to contact them for copyright clearance of the library books.

The high majority of the library books that Google is scanning are of absolutely no commercial significance to the publishers.  It's disingenuous to argue "theft" of something that no longer has monetary value. Any bestseller that Google scans would be licensed appropriately from the publisher, so they really have nothing to worry about.  The library materials do have historical and cultural value, which is why I support Google Book Search despite my reservations.

Our copyright laws predate the Internet, and are now woefully out of date. The argument that Google Book Search violates copyright is one interpretation of this law. You could say, "Just write a new law then. Don't break the old one."  But that assumes that the  law is being broken.  A very important library concept, in addition to fair use, is the "first sale doctrine." Essentially, a  library is free to redistribute any book that it has lawfully acquired. I argue that the library portion of Google Book Search lies comfortably within the parameters of the first sale doctrine, and that there is no need to let old notions trample new possibilities.

Some Librarians are Conservatives Too

One good result of today's procrastination sessions was my discovery of the Heretical Librarian blog. Its author is David Durant, a self-professed conservative librarian from North Carolina. In September 2005 he penned an article, "The Loneliness of a Conservative Librarian", for the Chronicle of Higher Education.  Durant finds librarians, as a whole, to be a group of leftist zealots. He has sundered his membership in the American Library Association, and learned never to speak his mind at ALA meetings. The blog--which links to other conservative librarian blogs--has been liberating for him.

Last year at the Medical Library Association meeting, one of the keynote speakers made a comment that was strongly critical of the Iraq war. This received strong applause, including from myself. Later in the speech there was a brief acknowledgment of  how horrible Saddam Hussein is.  This received weak applause, and people soon stopped clapping.  The liberals had carried the day, and would no doubt be listening to NPR very soon.

Durant is absolutely right.  Librarians are predominantly liberal, and not as tolerant of other views as we believe ourselves to be.  This is just human nature, perhaps.  But for a profession that supposedly values the open exchange of ideas, this is something that we must guard against.

I truly find George W. Bush to be a frightening President, who is worthy of impeachment for violation of our laws. That doesn't give me the right to castigate Mr. Durant for seeing things differently.  I may be mystified by his point of view, but I should keep that fact to myself.

Although I'm sympathetic to Mr. Durant's plight, there is a danger in going too far to accommodate divergent perspectives.  Right now David Horowitz is campaigning to restore "balance" among university professors, whom he claims tilt too far to the left.  They probably do, and just like librarians could stand to be more open-minded.  But the truth is that people with liberal, skeptical temperaments are attracted to the professoriate.  There is no doubt that bleeding-heart liberals have a hard time being hard in corporate boardrooms. Why isn't Horowitz campaigning for them?

Those Ungrateful People on the Coasts

The assault on our Constitution will get lots of assistance this week.  For the next three days, leading administration officials--culminating with the President himself--will defend what cannot be defended: the President's wiretap program, justified in the name of national security. It is illegal, and the President should be impeached.

Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, for one, thinks that the annoying liberals need to pipe down about this whole wiretap thing. On an early Republican campaign stop in Iowa, he said, "The eavesdropping is a big matter on the coasts for people who are inclined to dislike the president." 

Ah, yes, the coasts: The font of all that is evil and unrighteous in the glorious US of A. Romney then brought it home to the heartland, where the real Americans live: "The great majority of Americans think it is the president's first responsibility to protect the lives of American citizens in an urgent setting where there is a threat of terrorism."  Me, too, Mitt. And I have enough faith in the Constitution--which was crafted on the coast--to know that he can protect us while defending the Constitution too.

A short later Romney retracted himself, to say that he could not support the wiretaps if they turn out to be illegal.  A small detail, which I'm glad he acknowledges.

There's a double insult here: In the Romney formulation , coastal critics of the President are not true Americans, while everyone between the coasts blindly supports whatever the President does.  As someone who grew up between the coasts, I know that many friends and neighbors are smarter than this. 

But it is true that the President gets more slack in Ohio than in New York City.  Thank goodness for the coasts.

Honoring the Troops

When decorated Vietnam veteran Jack Murtha, a Democratic congressman from Pennsylvania, called for a rapid withdrawal from Iraq last November, I was not sure what to think.  We have created a terrorist-breeding mess, but also removed a tyrant. Leaving rapidly might make the whole thing worse. Then again, staying around indefinitely might be just as bad.  There are no easy answers, mostly because the Bush administration completely ignored solid post-war planning.

Even though I am more equivocal than Murtha, I do know that he is an honorable man who has served his country in much more dangerous ways than the President, Vice-President, or Secretary of Defense.  And now this honorable man has enraged his inferiors.  Smears against Murtha's service have begun, and I am once again ashamed that such shallow people are the leaders of my country.

As James Webb, a secretary of the Navy for Ronald Reagan, pointed out in the Times yesterday, the Murtha attacks fit a pattern: Underlings smear the record of honorable people, while senior member s of the Bush team plead ignorance and feign disgust.  They did it to John McCain, they did it to John Kerry, and now they're doing it to Jack Murtha.

Since Webb worked for Reagan, he is clearly no liberal.  Honest conservatives also see the treachery within the Bush regime.  It is a regime that says we must "honor the troops" as a means of thwarting debate. But when those honorable troops speak their mind anyway, they are treated with such disdain that it is clear that they were nothing more than administration props.

Soldiers are beginning to notice how the president really feels about them.  This year, many Iraq war veterans are running for Congress.  And with only one exception, they are running as Democrats. 

Legal Analysis of Google Book Search

The Congressional Research Service has published a balanced and succinct analysis of the legal questions raised by library participation in Google Book Search.   The piece does not drown in legalese, and reading it clears the brain of the spin surrounding this topic.

The central question is whether the program is a fair use of copyrighted works, or a massive violation of copyright. Google aims to display snippets of the search results from books, although it would scan the entire work. In many cases people would choose to buy these books, which benefits publishers and authors. In even more cases, people from across the globe--who would otherwise never see it--would have access to a book that a library has purchased legally. Publishers say the very act of scanning is the copyright violation, whatever happens afterwards. 

Google says the ends justify the means. I agree, with some hesitation, because of the inescapable fact that Google is a business. Such large-scale attempt to enhance the reach of cultural treasures is the role of government, working in concert with the private sector.  If this were the case  today, the program would face hardly any resistance.

The Boss

Last night Helen and I attended the kick-off concert for the New York Guitar Festival.  In a free show, many artists played a track apiece from Bruce Springsteen's haunting 1982 work "Nebraska".  By the time the night was over, we had heard the entire album.

Two tracks that did not appear on "Nebraska" resurfaced on "Born in the USA" in 1984: the title track, and "I'm on Fire."  We heard both last night.  Jen Chapin left no doubt that the real meaning of "Born in the USA" is not that everything is right and good on the homefront, despite Ronald Reagan's opportunistic interpretation at the time.  Harry Manx offered a sobering version of "I'm on Fire," using a "guitar" fashioned from a cigar box and two broom handles.

Springsteen himself  came on to do the encore with all of the night's musicians, and the place exploded.  He was not on the official bill, but that didn't stop us from hoping he would come. As soon as he started singing--on a rousing version of Woody Guthrie's "Oklahoma Hills"--I remembered why he is The Boss.