At the time some people argued that said magazine was “an extension of the internet” and entitled to publish whatever bits it saw fit. Google’s actions seem to stem from a similar hubris.

For all their good intentions Google doesn’t devote much effort to putting up a firewall between their search and advertising operations. Their search results now include paid-only content (eg portal.acm.org), and there’s plenty of reason for authors to worry if their free content will be used for commercial purposes.

If you choose to opt-in, so be it. Bear in mind though, that some authors might insist on getting paid for the act of Google’s scanning &/or insist on a portion of Google’s advertising revenue derived from people searching for their content, which may actually generate more money than royalty checks BTW.

Authors and publishers should be demanding that Google explicate their long term business model and revenue motivations are for doing this instead of proceeding blindly down the “just trust us, we’re not evil” Google aisle.

Clearly Google see this endeavor as profitable in the future, why should Google not compensate authors and publishers for their works by sharing in the profits?

Regardless of Google’s motivation, it is wrong legally and ethically for Google to usurp author and publisher rights and assume consent to their works being digitized and monetized according to Google’s grand plans.