Internet Archive forced to remove 500,000 books after publishers’ court win: SoylentNews Submission

Internet Archive forced to remove 500,000 books after publishers’ court win

Accepted submission by Freeman at 2024-06-25 15:43:02 from the money money money dept.

Freeman [soylentnews.org] writes:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/06/internet-archive-forced-to-remove-500000-books-after-publishers-court-win/ [arstechnica.com]

As a result of book publishers successfully suing the Internet Archive [arstechnica.com] (IA) last year, the free online library that strives to keep growing online access to books recently shrank by about 500,000 titles.

IA reported [archive.org] in a blog post this month that publishers abruptly forcing these takedowns triggered a "devastating loss" for readers who depend on IA to access books that are otherwise impossible or difficult to access.

To restore access, IA is now appealing, hoping to reverse the prior court's decision by convincing the US Court of Appeals in the Second Circuit that IA's controlled digital lending [archive.org] of its physical books should be considered fair use under copyright law. An April court filing [courtlistener.com] shows that IA intends to argue that the publishers have no evidence that the e-book market has been harmed by the open library's lending, and copyright law is better served by allowing IA's lending than by preventing it.
[...]
IA will have an opportunity to defend its practices when oral arguments start in its appeal on June 28.

"Our position is straightforward; we just want to let our library patrons borrow and read the books we own, like any other library," Freeland wrote, while arguing that the "potential repercussions of this lawsuit extend far beyond the Internet Archive" and publishers should just "let readers read."
[...]
After publishers won an injunction stopping IA's digital lending, which "limits what we can do with our digitized books," IA's help page [archive.org] said, the open library started shrinking. While "removed books are still available to patrons with print disabilities," everyone else has been cut off, causing many books in IA's collection to show up as "Borrow Unavailable."
[...]
In an IA blog [archive.org], one independent researcher called IA a "lifeline," while others claimed academic progress was "halted" or delayed by the takedowns.

"I understand that publishers and authors have to make a profit, but most of the material I am trying to access is written by people who are dead and whose publishers have stopped printing the material," wrote one IA fan from Boston.
[...]
In the open letter to publishers—which Techdirt opined [techdirt.com] "will almost certainly fall on extremely deaf ears"—the Internet Archive and its fans "respectfully" asked publishers "to restore access to the books" that were removed.

They also suggested that "there is a way" to protect authors' rights and ensure they're fairly compensated "while still allowing libraries to do what they have always done—help readers read."
[...]
For IA's digital lending to be considered fair use, the brief said, the court must balance all factors favoring a ruling of fair use, including weighing that IA's use is "non-commercial, serves important library missions long recognized by Congress, and causes no market harm."

Publishers with surging profits have so far struggled to show any evidence of market harm [arstechnica.com], while IA has offered multiple expert opinions showing that ebook licensing was not negatively impacted by IA's digital lending.

"Publishers' ebook revenues have grown since IA began its lending," IA argued.

And even when IA temporarily stopped limiting the number of loans to provide emergency access to books during the pandemic—which could be considered a proxy for publishers' fear that IA's lending could pose a greater threat if it became much more widespread—IA's expert "found no evidence of market harm."
[...]
While IA fights to end the injunction, its other library services continue growing, IA has said [archive.org]. IA "may still digitize books for preservation purposes" and "provide access to our digital collections" through interlibrary loan and other means. IA can also continue lending out-of-print and public domain books.

One IA fan in rural India fears that if publishers win, it would permanently cut many people like her off from one of the few reliable resources she has to access rare books.

"If you are going to ban online availability of these resources, what about us?" she asked.

Previously on SoylentNews:
Internet Archive's Legal Woes Mount as Record Labels Sue for $400M [soylentnews.org] - 20230822
The Internet Archive Reaches An Agreement With Publishers In Digital Book-Lending Case [soylentnews.org] - 20230815
A Federal Judge Has Ruled Against the Internet Archive in a Lawsuit Brought by Four Book Publishers [soylentnews.org] - 20230327
Internet Archive Faces Uphill Battle in Lawsuit Over its Free Digital Library [soylentnews.org] - 20230322
Internet Archive Files Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Publisher Copyright Infringement Lawsuit [soylentnews.org] - 20200731
EFF and California Law Firm Durie Tangri Defending Internet Archive from Publisher Lawsuit [soylentnews.org] - 20200629
Publishers Sue the Internet Archive Over its Open Library, Declare it a Pirate Site [soylentnews.org] - 20200603

Original Submission

SoylentNews

SoylentNews is people

Navigation

Sections

SoylentNews

Submission Preview

Internet Archive forced to remove 500,000 books after publishers’ court win