Image – Getty iStockPhoto: Alessandro Malerba
Porter Anderson, Editor-in-Chief | @Porter Anderson
“Copyright is not about infringement, but about serving the public interest.”
○On Friday (March 15), four major publishers (Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, Penguin Random House, and Wiley) oppose an appeal of the loss of the Internet Archive on March 24, 2023 in a copyright lawsuit. A preliminary document was submitted. Hachette Book Group et al., v. Internet Archive.
The original lawsuit was filed by the publisher in June 2020, alleging that the Internet Archive had “digitized millions of print and book titles.” [distributed] The resulting pirated e-books are available for free from that site without the consent of the publisher or author or the payment of license fees. ”
In a summary judgment nearly a year ago, Judge John G. Koeltl of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York wrote: Just in case “Copyright Infringement Case,” and his opinion included a firm condemnation of the controversial concept of “managed digital lending.”
Nevertheless, the Internet Archive kept its promise to appeal, arguing that Judge Koeltl did not understand the facts of the case and that his decision was wrong.
terrence hart
In response to the Internet Archive’s appeal, Terrence Hart, general counsel for the American Publishers Association, wrote in September: – Shifting activity constitutes copyright infringement, consistent with many other precedents that define a clear line between fair use and first sale provisions.
“The idea that the Internet Archive or library could convert millions of e-books from print to public distribution without the consent or compensation of the authors or publishers has absolutely no legal support.
“Plaintiff publishers intend to vigorously litigate this appeal on appeal, which embodies the fundamental principles of copyright. Copyright is not an infringement, but a powerhouse of creativity that serves the public interest.”
The Association of American Publishers then announced the submission of a new brief, emphasizing the following points from the new brief:
- “
Managed digital lending is a frontal assault on the fundamental copyright principle that copyright owners have exclusive control over the terms of sale for each of the different formats of their works. This principle has created a wide variety of book, film, television, and music formats available to consumers. Enjoy today. - “…there is no parallel between the Internet Archive’s conversion of millions of print books into e-books and the historical practice of lending print books. We also believe that the Internet Archive will provide authors and their publishers with every penny.” Distributing e-books without payment is also inconsistent with the modern practice of libraries obtaining licenses to lend e-books to local communities and legally enjoying the benefits of digital distribution.
- The Internet Archive operates a mass digitization company that copies millions of fully copyrighted print books and distributes the resulting pirated ebooks from its site for free to anyone in the world. I am. The district court granted summary judgment, and under long-standing case law, he properly held that the Internet Archive’s infringement was not saved by fair use because each of the four factors weighed against the Internet Archive.
- “In short, the Internet Archive distributes a publisher’s copyrighted material in a marketplace that the publisher has exclusive rights to exploit as the copyright owner, and the Internet Archive distributes e-books to its customers. “This is exactly the kind of harm that The Fourth Element seeks to prevent.”
- “There is nothing transformative about the Internet Archive’s controlled digital lending practices, because they do little more than “repackage or republish” works. “The Internet Archive does not reproduce works that are the subject of litigation for the purpose of providing criticism, commentary, or information.” Rather, the Internet Archive does not reproduce works that are the subject of litigation for the purpose of providing critique, commentary, or information. It admits that it has a “similar” purpose to e-books, namely to make books readable, which precludes transformativeness “even if the two are not perfect substitutes.”
- “The Internet Archive’s flawed policy argument is that ‘laws need to change to enable libraries to improve access to books through technological innovation’…But across the country ‘traditional library lending Public libraries that are implementing this technology are already leveraging this technological innovation to publishers. authorized Library eBooks – Serves “people from diverse geographic, cultural, and socio-economic backgrounds,” “individuals with disabilities,” and “rural and urban populations,” and promotes research. In other words, publishers have innovated. [that] The Internet Archive became a belated champion. The Internet Archive is just stealing it.
- “The accredited library e-book market is booming, and readers have never had more access to free licensed e-books than they do today… The number is 430 million books, an increase of more than 500 percent since 2012.
- “Copyright law benefits the public not by idolizing consumer convenience, but by guaranteeing authors and publishers the right to receive compensation for electronic book versions of their works.
- “While it should be clear that the market could be catastrophic, the danger to publishers’ e-book market is by no means hypothetical. Not only because of the historical damage inflicted, but also because the rapid development of generative AI poses new threats that involve both the mass reproduction and replacement of literary and other works of authorship.
- “The Internet Archive is attempting to justify its massive breach through a completely fabricated theory that it calls ‘Controlled Digital Lending’ (‘CDL’). It is a country that claims to be a “more efficient version of modern lending”. ” But, as the district court ruled, “there is no support for the case or legal principles.”[ing the] The concept that managed digital lending constitutes fair use” and “[e]It’s just the authority pointing in a different direction. ”
The 75-page brief filed by the publisher with the Court of Appeals on Friday can be viewed here (PDF).
Learn more about Publishing Perspectives’ copyrights, learn more about Managed Digital Lending, learn more about the Internet Archive, learn more about the American Publishers Association, and learn more about the International Association of Publishers.
See also:
