Why Google Print is a good idea

Reason #1648: Course reserves.

Right now I'm taking this fantastic course at Simmons about archives, collective memory, and history. Despite the fact that I'm enjoying it immensely, nevertheless the class is seriously chapping my ass due to the fact that many of the readings for each week are not available online as e-reserves, as they primarily consist selected chapters from books instead of journal articles. Whereas the latter has become routinely accessible with the click of the mouse, thanks to periodicals that are now "born" digital and such vast electronic archives at JSTOR and Project Muse which have retroactively made much of the 19th and 20th century's print serials available online, the former remain by and large tethered to their physical containers behind the circulation desk. Never mind that there is little if any difference between a journal article and an essay or chapter in a scholarly monograph, unless the professor makes a special effort to ensure that portions of a book are digitized, the path of least resistance will almost always be chosen, forcing students not only to trek into the library but to shell out their own coin to make photocopies of the weekly reading.

This is a niche market just waiting to be filled by a resource such as Google Print, which could save libraries time and effort by serving as the middleman for course reserves. In fact two books from my readings for this week have already been scanned by Google, and I'm imagining it's only just a matter of time before virtually every English print monograph published in North America or the U.K. is similarly indexed. Provided that Google Print could work out a satisfactory scheme of royalties and licensing fees, this would benefit all parties involved -- even the libraries, who even though obliged to pay a little extra for their e-reserves copyright would see significant savings against the wear and tear from the systematic repeated photocopying of their print collection. Or Google could get rid of the intermediary entirely and sell portions of the book directly to students. Seeing that I'm already paying $.10 a page at the library photocopier to use material that is supposedly "free", give me a good reason why I shouldn't give that money instead to the publishers (or better yet, the individual authors)?