First, Google presents “snippets” of text related to the search phrase in user search results; these don’t exceed more than a few dozen words, and definitely fall within the stipulated “fair use” range. I like to think of this as the equivalent of the 30-second preview on the iTunes Music Store.

Secondly, when someone chooses to explore a search result in context (i.e. I search for “dog,” see that it’s mentioned on p. 143 of a certain book, and click that result to see the image of that page), Google only allows me to see that page and several pages before and after it. This doesn’t have a good music metaphor, but I suppose one could argue that it’s similar to a longer preview clip, or maybe the equivalent of one free song from an album of 100 songs.

Google claims that this second practice also falls under fair use guidelines. Though I want to be one day, I’m no expert and can’t attest to how true that claim is. But in general I believe Google’s argument that this project really benefits content producers more than it hurts them. Readers can search for what they’re looking for, see it in context, and if they want the book they can go check it out from the library or buy it online (indeed, Google Books provides prominent links to search libraries and purchase from Amazon and other online vendors). In fact Google, by allowing content providers to request that previews of their books not be made available, may be performing a courtesy that it is not legally obligated to perform.

While I appreciate authors’ concerns, I think they really just do not grasp either the purpose or the promise of the Google Books project.