Internet archive loses in first trial of copyright lawsuit with major publisher over copyright of e-book
In a trial in which a major publisher sued
gov.uscourts.nysd.537900.188.0.pdf
(PDF file) https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.537900/gov.uscourts.nysd.537900.188.0.pdf
The Fight Continues - Internet Archive Blogs
https://blog.archive.org/2023/03/25/the-fight-continues/
Judge Decides Against Internet Archive | File 770
https://file770.com/judge-decides-against-internet-archive/
Internet Archive Loses Copyright Lawsuit: What to Know | Time
https://time.com/6266147/internet-archive-copyright-infringement-books-lawsuit/
The Internet Archive has been running a program called “ Open Library ” for lending digital books online for many years. There are restrictions such as However, due to the declaration of a state of emergency in each country due to the epidemic of the new coronavirus infection, the number of people who cannot access the actual library has increased, so Internet archives have temporarily relaxed restrictions. We have released the 'National Emergency Library ' that allows you to borrow up to 10 books from the Open Library collection without waiting.
The National Emergency Library, which opened on March 24, 2020, was scheduled to continue until June 30, 2020, or the end of the United States' national emergency declaration, whichever was later, but was 'open to the public.' It was closed ahead of schedule on June 16, 2020 in response to a complaint from four major publishers that the published books contain copyrighted material.
The plaintiff, the publishing company, claimed that it 'infringed the copyright of 127 books by scanning printed matter without the plaintiff's permission and lending digital copies to website users.' On the other hand, the Internet Archive argues that it is 'exempted by the principle of fair use.'
The fair use doctrine permits some unauthorized uses of copyrighted material to achieve the very purpose of copyright, which is to 'promote scientific progress and the useful arts.' For example, the act of fair use of a copyrighted work for the purpose of criticism, comment, reporting, education, academic research, etc., does not constitute copyright infringement.
In the first instance, before the District Court for the Southern District of New York, the main issue was whether Internet Archive lending practices were 'transformative.'
The Internet Archive distributes published books in the form of secondary use, but at this time, we add something new to the book with a further purpose or a different character, and add additional expressions, meanings, and messages. I am not modifying the original work.
The fair use doctrine considers whether the use of the work is in the public interest, how much it affects the copyright holder, how much of the work has been copied, and how much of the work has been copied. We are considering whether it was 'transformed' into the Internet Archive, but this secondary use of the Internet Archive was not recognized as 'transformative'.
Libraries are able to lend out physical books to users because they have a '
The Internet Archive determines the number of e-book lending by counting up to one copy of the physical book owned by itself and the copy of the book owned by the affiliated library. However, there was no such practice in this pandemic, and it was also pointed out that the Internet Archive was lending out more copies of e-books than it had the rights to.
In addition, the possibility that the Internet archive was profiting from the publication of e-books was also pursued.
Copyright law requires several factors to be considered when determining whether a use of a work in a particular case is fair use. One of them is whether the secondary use is of a commercial nature or for non-profit educational purposes.
According to the plaintiff's allegations, the Internet Archive is collecting new members and soliciting donations by publishing Open Library and National Emergency Library. In addition, in partnership with Better World Books (BWB), which sells online books, a commercial act of receiving a portion of the price paid by the customer to BWB from BWB by setting up a button 'Buy with BWB' on the website It was also claimed that For this reason, the Internet Archive's actions can be regarded as ``obtaining advantages and benefits,'' and the judgment was made in favor of the plaintiff in terms of distinguishing between commercial and non-commercial.
A subsequent factor was also considered: 'how the use or reproduction use of the copyrighted work will affect the potential market or value of the copyrighted work'. This element focuses on 'whether offering competing alternatives by secondary users will take over the original market.'
In recent years, with the prosperity of e-books, publishers have developed a business of licensing e-books to libraries. These businesses are a major source of revenue for publishers, but the Internet Archive provides books without paying publishers licensing fees for e-books. As such, the Internet Archive was found to be displacing publishers. The Internet Archive claims that it ``supports research, scholarship, and cultural participation by making books easily accessible to users who live far from physical libraries''. It has been determined that the profits cannot outweigh the harm done to publishers.
District Court Judge John Kertl said, ``The use of Internet Archive e-books does not comply with the above standards, not only when deploying the National Emergency Library, but also when using the lending library extensively.'' The Open Library, which is still open to the public, may also be affected.
The Authors Guild, which provides legal advice to professional writers, tweeted that it was 'moved' by the first trial's ruling. 'As we have long argued, scanning and lending a book without permission or consideration is not fair use, it is theft and devalues the author's work,' he added.
We are thrilled by the decision in the Internet Archive/Open Library lawsuit. As we have long argued, scanning & lending books w/out permission or compensation is NOT fair use—it is theft & it devalues authors' works . t.co/STKEjVHRoV
—The Authors Guild (@AuthorsGuild) March 25, 2023
On the other hand, more than 300 prominent authors, including Naomi Klein and Neil Gaiman, have signed an open letter calling on publishers and industry groups to stop the lawsuits, which is split even within the industry. I can see that.
The Internet Archive says, ``Libraries are more than the customer service arm of a company.In order for democracy to develop on a global scale, libraries must maintain their historic role in society: owning, preserving, and lending books. We must be able to. This decision is a blow to libraries, readers and writers, and we plan to appeal.'
Related Posts:
in Web Service, Posted by log1p_kr