http://chronicle.com/weekly/v54/i20/20a01902.htm (Subscribers only) has a very short interview with Peter Brantley (see http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/4585407/ )

Excerpt:

Q. Why are you concerned about Google Book Search?

A. The quality of the book scans is not consistently high. The algorithm Google uses to return search results is opaque. Then there's the commercial aspect. Google will attempt to find ways to make money off the service.

Q. Shouldn't Google be commended for helping to preserve library books?

A. The company is not preserving books. It is creating an archive for Google's own purposes.

Q. How does Google Book Search hurt libraries?

A. The libraries have to make a significant commitment in terms of getting their books to Google. The books have to come off the shelves. Then after being scanned they have to be put back on the shelves. And this resource drain is going to limit the ability of libraries to engage in other activities.

Q. Why are you opposed to an out-of-court settlement to the Google lawsuit?

A. A settlement leaves unresolved how people can use out-of-print books whose owners cannot be identifiednorphan worksnand the question of what is fair use regarding digitized books.

Q. How should Google treat orphan works?

A. No one should be making money from these. Yet that will happen because their [copyright] status is unknown.

Q. What would be a good outcome to the litigation?

A. Having a court determine once and for all that it is fair use to digitize a copyrighted work and make a snippet of it publicly available.