Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back

View Post [edit]

Poster:	stbalbach	Date:	November 03, 2009 08:12:09am
Forum:	texts	Subject:	Re: Google rejects?

Google is/was notorious for poor quality scans, in particular in the first few years. There are even entire blogs set up just to show examples of things like peoples fingers in pages etc.. Internet Archive scans have always been much better quality. Google has improved some recently and even begun rescanning some of its previous ones. The Google scans on IA are just copies that users have copied over, they are not rejects.

Reply to this post

Reply [edit]

Poster:	Time Traveller	Date:	November 03, 2009 09:23:22pm
Forum:	texts	Subject:	Re: Google rejects?

so I was correct about us moving stuff over from Google.

and could the bad scans by Google, have been before it began pushing Google Books as a major WWW service? (money maker)

Reply to this post

Reply [edit]

Poster:	garthus	Date:	November 03, 2009 09:56:28pm
Forum:	texts	Subject:	Re: Google rejects?

Peter,

See:

http://www.archive.org/details/Order_To_Show_Cause_With_TRO_New_York_State__763

For one of the many cases which I have been invloved in; this one is returnable November 12 of this year. I will be posting the others when I get the time. (Seems like engineers also make good lawyers) Did this without the help or input of any Lawyers. Wonderful how as the system gets more complicated, those with the knowledge can use it against itself.

Gerry