2020 years, Publisher Hachette (Hachette) , HarperCollins (HarperCollins) , John Wiley (John Wiley) And Penguin Random House (Penguin Random House) Suing the Internet Archive for copyright infringement, it "Open library" Called pirate sites.

The Internet Archive's library is a non-profit organization, Responsible for scanning physical books, It is then lent to readers in e-book format. Readers can also borrow books scanned and digitized in-house by publishers, But these books have technical limitations, unreproducible.

Based on centuries-old library ideas, Only one reader can rent a digital copy of a physical book at a time. At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, The Internet Archive has activated the National Emergency Library, These restrictions were temporarily relaxed.

Mass copyright infringement or fair use?

Readers are happy to use the library, But not all rights holders are happy with the Internet Archive's scanning and lending activities. Publishers themselves are not against libraries, Nor is it against e-book lending, But gain "accredit" The library is usually officially licensed, Or negotiate specific terms. The Internet Archive has no such license.

therefore, Publishers see the Internet Archive's library as a rogue act of willful copyright infringement on a massive scale, It just broke their bottom line. therefore, They want it permanently removed.

The publishers said in the lawsuit: "Without any permission, And without paying any fees to the author or publisher, The Internet Archive scans printed books, Upload the illegally scanned books to its servers, And distribute full verbatim digital copies of these books through a public-facing website. "

The Internet Archive completely disagrees with the allegations of infringement. It emphasizes that libraries provide an important service, At the heart of its defense is the legal concept of transformational fair use.

A judgment of liability and an agreement to settle

New York U. S. District Judge John F．Colter (John Koeltl) After weighing the arguments of both sides, he supported the publisher's point of view. This year 3 month, The court granted their motion for summary judgment, This effectively means that libraries are indeed liable for copyright infringement.

The court directed both parties to agree to a settlement judgment. After weeks of negotiations, The two sides recently filed a draft agreement with the court.

The judgment was accompanied by a permanent injunction, The library is prohibited from copying or disseminating without the permission of the right holder "Books covered (covered books) " Digital copy.

The Internet Archive can appeal the restrictions, That means if the Internet Archive wins its appeal, The agreement will be moot.

Books covered?

Book publishers and the Internet Archive agreed on almost all aspects of the judgment's recommendations, Except for one thing. Two-party pair "Books covered" There is still disagreement about the term, And leave the matter to the courts.

Publishers want the ban to cover all their copyrighted works, Including works that are not available in e-book format. According to the Internet Archive, If the publisher does not provide electronic versions, The digitization of physical books is fair use.

The Internet Archive explains: "This case involves only works where publishers offer e-books, The scope of any prohibition should be limited accordingly. "

Publishers disagree, And emphasized that the court has made it clear, The Internet Archive is not allowed to digitize and mass-distribute printed books without permission. If the publisher wants, They also have the right not to publish e-books.

The publisher wrote: "It is crucial, The law clearly stipulates, The right to decide whether to publish a book in electronic format belongs to the author and publisher of the book, Not the Internet Archive. "

next

The court must now determine "Books covered" How wide is the definition. In the recommended judgment, Both sides remain open to this issue.

It is obvious that, The Internet Archive must make changes to its lending program. The group says, Once the verdict is granted, It will convey this information to the reader.

At the same time, The library also made it clear, It will fight the relevant orders, Because it believes libraries should be able to digitize and borrow books outside of a strict licensing ecosystem.

Brewster, founder of the Internet Archive．Kahler (Brewster Kahle) According to: "Present Day, Libraries are under attack on an unprecedented scale, From book bans to money freezes, Or an aggressive lawsuit like this one against our library. "

Karler scale: "These actions are cutting off the public's access to truth. We must have a strong library, That is why we are appealing this decision. "

At the same time, The Internet Archive is also facing a new legal battle. recently, Several prominent record labels sued the nonprofit. The companies accused the Internet Archive of flagrant copyright infringement on hundreds of thousands of phonograms. (Be compiled from torrentfreak. com)

TRANSLATORS: Rason group　proofread: Liu Peng



　　disclaimer: This network reprint or compile the original articles are from the network, Does not represent the views of this website or confirm the authenticity of its content. If the source is mislabeled or the copyright of the article is involved, Please contact us, This website will be corrected in due course, delete, thank you.