-CNET News, November 16, 2009 by Elinor Mills
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10398995-93.html
“The risk of price gouging over time is very high and universities in particular have experienced excessive increases in prices of scholarly journals over the last few years,” she said.
-The Wall Street Journal, Law Blog, November 17, 2009 by Ashby Jones
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/11/17/the-google-books-settlement-a-lawsuit-ripe-for-congress/
“Nobody should get a license to orphans without congressional action,” said Pamela Samuelson, a professor at UC-Berkeley School of Law. “This is a legislative matter — you shouldn’t use a class action for that.”
-The Huffington Post, November 17, 2009 by Pamela Samuelson
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pamela-samuelson/new-google-book-settlemen_b_358544.html
To my mind, the most serious problem with GBS 1.0 has not been cured by GBS 2.0. Google will still get a de facto monopoly right to commercialize all out-of-print books, including the orphans, through the class action settlement process. No one else can get a comparable license, and hence no one else can offer a comprehensive database of books to allow competition in the market for institutional subscriptions.
-Library Journal, November 18, 2009 by Norman Oder
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6707799.html
“While I think that there were some substantial changes that were made to it, it more had to do with getting foreign rights holders out of the settlement and trying to respond at least in part to issues that the Department of Justice raised,” Samuelson said.