[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

Yes they do get their own collections scanned (see Side Note).

Irrelevant.
Scanning isn't at issue.
Distribution is the violation.

Since IA apologists keep referring to it: Look to google, they scanned a zillion books but distributed none. Nothing that tbey did reduced sales.

Libraries like Hathitrust aren't scanning just any random book from Barnes and Noble: they are scanning historically significant rare books for *academic* purposes and internal use to prevent degradation of the originals.

One more time: there are four tests for fair use. (see below).
One is whether there is market damage.
A second is the *purpose*.
Haithrust and other scanning universities are doing no market damage for their books because there is no market to damage.
And their purpose is academic study and preservation.
That has been found in court to be fair use.

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/201...copyright-suit

A federal district court has dismissed a copyright infringement suit brought by the Authors Guild that would have prevented the digitizing of books by university libraries and restricted use of many of the digitized works.

The Oct. 10 ruling will allow HathiTrust, a partnership of 69 research institutions, including Cornell, to continue to use a collection of some 10 million books in digital form. Cornell and several other universities will also be able to continue a partnership with Google to scan books from their collections. Cornell also expects to revive its investigation into making digitized books available to blind and print-disabled students.

In 2007 Cornell joined five libraries whose books are scanned for the Google Books Library Project, which now offers a searchable database of some 20 million volumes contributed by libraries and publishers. Public domain works can be read in full online; users may see only snippets of copyrighted works, with links to buy the book. Cornell had been digitizing small collections of specialized materials for 15 years, accumulating perhaps 15,000 volumes up to that point, according to Peter Hirtle, senior policy adviser in Cornell University Library.

IA books are available for purchase all over, right now and their avowed purpose is to help people *avoid* buying. Their own words argue for summary judgment.

These tests come from the US courts, precedents going back decades, not random self-proclaimed blog "experts".

Try *this* random internetblov piece, before accepting any random opinion that just happens to meet your preferences:

https://www.perceptualedge.com/blog/?p=2464

People sometimes claim expertise in one field based on experience in another. This is a fallacious and deceitful claim. I have extensive experience in visual design, but I cannot claim expertise in architecture. Any building that I designed would most certainly crumble around me. I’m a skilled teacher, but this does not qualify me as a psychotherapist. That hasn’t stopped me from occasionally giving advice to friends, but without charge, which probably matches its worth. Although these fields of endeavor overlap in some ways, expertise in one does not convey expertise in another. No concert violinist would claim the transfer of that virtuosity to the saxophone, but IT professionals sometimes make claims that are every bit as audacious.

Or to paraphrase the TV ADS, there's lots of folks out there who aren't doctors but play one on the internet. Doesn't make their word mean anything.

We're discussing a copyright lawsuit: how about citing an actual US Judge with a background in copyright? Or at least the Stanford Law School library:

https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overvie.../four-factors/

Unfortunately, the only way to get a definitive answer on whether a particular use is a fair use is to have it resolved in federal court. Judges use four factors to resolve fair use disputes, as discussed in detail below. It’s important to understand that these factors are only guidelines that courts are free to adapt to particular situations on a case‑by‑case basis. In other words, a judge has a great deal of freedom when making a fair use determination, so the outcome in any given case can be hard to predict.

The four factors judges consider are:

• the purpose and character of your use
• the nature of the copyrighted work
• the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
• the effect of the use upon the potential market.

The IA is distribution the entirety of copyrighted books, without altering the content, for the purpose of helping people avoid the purchase of a commercial book.

That is four failures.
No valid defense.