The google case was because google was creating a searchable database of books to provide snippets and links to legal sources of the full book.
The Author's sued and they ended up with a settlement that was rejected by the judge because the AG was "negotiating" on behalf of unknown/non-consenting writers. A decade later, after a bunch of appeals and rulings that stripped out extraneous stuff including the whole orphan works mess , the case came back to basics: the database of scanned books that google wasn't publishing, just quoting snippets.
And that was ruled fair use.
The Internet archive is working off a different case and stretching it further than Ralph Dibny can reach.
Long trail of articles at tbe Digital Reader Blog among other places:
https://the-digital-reader.com/2018/...ecides-piracy/
Quote:
Authors have discovered that the Internet Archive has converted its lending library site into an out and out pirate site, and they are not happy,
Authors Protest Internet Archive Pirating Their Books Piracy
For the past few years the Internet Archive has been operating a site called The Open Library. This site fills some of the role of a public library by lending scanned copies of print books.
The site existed in a quasi-legal state, protected by a legal opinion that kept it from being explicitly labeled a pirate site, but that legal fig leaf was stripped away this past week when The Open Library director Chris Freeland announced that the Internet Archive would now start "lending" ebooks without limits.
To address our unprecedented global and immediate need for access to reading and research materials, as of today, March 24, 2020, the Internet Archive will suspend waitlists for the 1.4 million (and growing) books in our lending library by creating a National Emergency Library to serve the nation’s displaced learners. This suspension will run through June 30, 2020, or the end of the US national emergency, whichever is later.
During the waitlist suspension, users will be able to borrow books from the National Emergency Library without joining a waitlist, ensuring that students will have access to assigned readings and library materials that the Internet Archive has digitized for the remainder of the US academic calendar, and that people who cannot physically access their local libraries because of closure or self-quarantine can continue to read and thrive during this time of crisis, keeping themselves and others safe.
What they are calling the National Emergency Library is really just The Open Library with a new name, and new legal issues.
The problem with this is that The Open Library's only protection was an untested legal opinion called Controlled Digital Lending. Go read it and you will see that it says said that a library could lend one scanned copy of a print book for each copy they had in their archive. This is great - in principle - because it means libraries can preserve their copies of old and rare print books and instead lend digital copies.
CDL is a great idea, in my opinion, because it helps solve the orphan works problem. I do not however agree with how the Internet Archive has latched on to it as a justification for lending books that are widely available in stores and libraries.
But that does not matter today. In removing waitlists, the Internet Archive is discarding CDL as a defense, and is lending far more copies of each book than they have the rights for.
|
https://the-digital-reader.com/2018/...works-defense/
https://the-digital-reader.com/2018/...-dmca-notices/
https://the-digital-reader.com/2019/...-open-library/
https://the-digital-reader.com/2020/...g-their-books/
The unconstested fact is they lend out copyrighted books without agreement by the owners of the copyright. The've floated a variety of excuses over time but since they are small and there is no $$$$ involved, they get a lot of finger pointing but no lawsuits. Which cost money to pursue.