Hachette v. Internet Archive

Hachette Book Group, Inc. v. Internet Archive, 542 F.Supp. 1156 (2023), is a case in which the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York determined that the Internet Archive committed copyright infringement by scanning and distributing copies of books online. Stemming from the creation of the National Emergency Library during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, publishing company Hachette Book Group alleged that the Open Library and the National Emergency Library facilitated copyright infringement. The case involves the fair use of controlled digital lending (CDL) systems.[1]

Hachette Book Group, Inc. v. Internet Archive
CourtUnited States District Court for the Southern District of New York
Full case nameHachette Book Group Inc., et al. v. Internet Archive, et al.
Court membership
Judge(s) sittingJohn G. Koeltl

Background
A woman scanning a book
The Internet Archive's practice of scanning books and lending them is central to Hachette v. Internet Archive.

The Internet Archive is a non-profit organization dedicated to preserving knowledge and based in San Francisco, California; the Archive maintains Open Library, a digital library index and lending system. As many of the works in the Internet Archive are under copyright, the Archive uses a controlled digital lending (CDL) system, a practice that relies upon digital rights management (DRM) to prevent unauthorized downloading or copying of copyrighted works. Open Library can generate digitized material (ebooks) from print copy. The Open Library CDL system ensures that only one digital copy is in use for each print copy or otherwise authorized ebook copy available.

In March 2020, as a result of shutdowns caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Internet Archive created the National Emergency Library, removing the waitlists used in Open Library and expanding access to these books for all readers. The National Emergency Library (NEL) was met with a lawsuit from four book publishers, and the library was shut down in June 2020.[2] The prior Open Library CDL system resumed after the 12 week NEL usage.

Lawsuit

On June 1, 2020, Hachette Book Group and other publishers, including Penguin Random House, HarperCollins, and Wiley, filed a lawsuit against the Internet Archive for the National Emergency Library.[3][4] The plaintiffs argued that the practice of CDL was illegal and not protected by the doctrine of Fair Use.[5]

Both sides filed motions for summary judgment. Judge John G. Koeltl ruled on March 24, 2023, against Internet Archive in the case, saying the National Emergency Library concept was not fair use, so the Archive infringed their copyrights by lending its ebook copies without the waitlist restriction. The 133 publishers' books in the suit are also available as ebooks from the publishers. The Internet Archive said afterwards it would appeal this ruling, but otherwise would continue other digital book services which have been previously cleared under case law, such as books for reading-impaired users.[6][7][1][8]

A final judgment is still pending. At issue is whether the lawsuit is limited to the 12 weeks of expanded lending through the NEL and whether Open Library self-generated ebook CDL lending is fair use in general.[9]

See also

References
  1. Peters, Jay; Hollister, Sean (March 24, 2023). "The Internet Archive has lost its first fight to scan and lend e-books like a library". The Verge. Archived from the original on March 25, 2023. Retrieved March 24, 2023.
  2. Brooke, Rachel (2023-03-20). "Judge Hears Oral Arguments in Hachette Book Group v. Internet Archive". Authors Alliance. Archived from the original on 2023-03-20. Retrieved 2023-03-25.
  3. Harris, Elizabeth (June 1, 2020). "Publishers Sue Internet Archive Over Free E-Books". The New York Times. Archived from the original on June 12, 2020. Retrieved March 24, 2023.
  4. "Hachette v. Internet Archive". Electronic Frontier Foundation. 2020-10-09. Archived from the original on 2023-03-25. Retrieved 2023-03-25.
  5. Robertson, Adi (2023-03-20). "The Internet Archive is defending its digital library in court today". The Verge. Archived from the original on 2023-03-25. Retrieved 2023-03-25.
  6. Hollister, Sean (2023-03-25). "The Internet Archive has lost its first fight to scan and lend e-books like a library". The Verge. Archived from the original on 2023-03-25. Retrieved 2023-03-25.
  7. Hernandez, Joe (26 March 2023). "A judge sided with publishers in a lawsuit over the Internet Archive's online library". NPR. Archived from the original on 27 March 2023. Retrieved 27 March 2023.
  8. Brittain, Blake; Brittain, Blake (2023-03-20). "Internet Archive faces skeptical judge in publishers' copyright lawsuit". Reuters. Archived from the original on 2023-03-25. Retrieved 2023-03-25.
  9. "OPINION" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2023-03-30.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.