recently, Internet Archive (Internet Archive) An opening statement was filed in the appeal against the district court's ruling, before, A district court ruled that its digital lending program violated copyright. The archive argues that the ruling should be overturned, On the grounds that its lending activities constituted fair use. Brewster, founder of the archive．Kahler (Brewster Kahle) consider, This legal battle is critical to the future of all libraries in the United States and around the world.

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

The Internet Archive's library is a non-profit organization, Physical books can be scanned, It is then lent to readers as an e-book. Customers can also borrow in-house scanned and digitized books, But there are technical limitations that prevent copying.

With a centuries-old library philosophy, The library allows only one reader at a time to rent a digital copy of a physical book for a limited time.

Mass copyright infringement or fair use?

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 "accredit" Libraries usually obtain official permission or negotiate specific terms. The Internet Archive is not licensed.

Publishers see the Internet Archive's library as a malicious operation that deliberately infringes copyright on a massive scale, And think it directly hurts their bottom line. therefore, They want it closed permanently.

The Internet Archive completely disputes the allegations of copyright infringement. The archive says, It provides an important service to the public, Just as it uses the protection of fair use as the basis of its legal defense.

After weighing the arguments on both sides, New York District Court Judge John F．Colter (John Koeltl) Sided with the publishers. This year3month, The court granted the publisher's motion for summary judgment, This effectively means that libraries are indeed responsible for copyright infringement.

The ruling and the associated permanent injunction effectively prohibit the library from reproducing or distributing without the permission of the rights holder "Covered book" Digital copy of. The Internet Archive eventually appealed the restrictions.

The Internet Archive filed an appeal

The other day, The Internet Archive filed its opening statement to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, The court was asked to reverse the decision of the lower court. The archives argue, The court should not dismiss its fair use plea.

Whether the library can mount a fair use defense depends on the balance4Individual correlation factor. According to the lower court, These factors favour publishers, But the library strongly disagrees. On the contrary, It believes its services promote the creation and sharing of knowledge, And that's the core purpose of copyright.

The complaint said: "The appeals court should overturn and rule that the digital lending service monitored by the Internet Archive is fair use. The practice is the same as a traditional library loan, Without prejudice to the interests of the author or publisher, Further promote the copyright goal of open and easy access to knowledge. "

A fair use analysis must weigh the benefits of both parties. The lower court did just that, But the Internet Archive says it drew the wrong conclusion, Without proper consideration of the monitored digital lending provided "Great public interest" .

There is no competition

One of the key fair use factors is whether the Internet Archive's lending program will be affected (Immediate threat) The traditional e-book lending market. The Internet Archive uses expert witnesses in its defense, It shows that it has not caused economic losses, It further argues that its services are fundamentally different from the e-book licensing market.

The Internet Archive provides access to digital copies of books, This is similar to those licensed libraries. however, The nonprofit group believes, Its lending program is not an alternative, Because the service it provides is fundamentally different.

The Internet Archive writes: "Such as, These libraries cannot use e-book licenses for permanent collections. But they can use licenses to easily change the selection of e-books they offer, To accommodate people's changing interests. "

This licensing model makes these libraries more flexible. however, They have to rely on books provided by commercial aggregators, These digital copies cannot be added to their files.

"By contrast, Monitored digital lending only allows libraries to lend books from their own permanent collection. They can save and lend out old versions, Maintain an accurate history of the book at the time of publication. "

The archive added: "They can also provide access that does not depend on publishers choosing to provide content. But libraries must have a copy of every book they check out, In this way, When people's interests or trends in reading change, They don't swap one book for another easily. "

The stakes are high

The argument highlighted here is only the Internet Archive74A small portion of the opening statement, The statement goes into more detail, And finally come to a conclusion: The district court's decision should be reversed.

In a recent blog post, Brewster, founder of the Internet Archive．Kahler (Brewster Kahle) write, If the lower court's ruling stands, Books, then, cannot be preserved for future generations in digital form, as paper versions have been archived for hundreds of years.

"The lawsuit is not just about the Internet Archive, It is about the role of all libraries in the digital age. The lawsuit is an attack on established practices used by hundreds of libraries to make their collections available to the public. "

Kahler concluded: "The disastrous ruling by the lower court in this case has implications far beyond our organization, It shapes the future of all libraries in America, unfortunately, It also affects the future of libraries around the world. " (Be compiled fromtorrentfreak. com)

TRANSLATORS: Wang Dan　proofread: Wu Xian



　　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.