AAP Members File Suit Against the the Internet Archive
/Today, Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, John Wiley & Sons, and Penguin Random House filed suit against the Internet Archive (IA).
In announcing the suit, the American Association of Publishers claimed the following:
Despite the self-serving library branding of its operations, IA’s conduct bears little resemblance to the trusted role that thousands of American libraries play within their communities and as participants in the lawful copyright marketplace. IA scans books from cover to cover, posts complete digital files to its website, and solicits users to access them for free by signing up for Internet Archive Accounts. The sheer scale of IA’s infringement described in the complaint—and its stated objective to enlarge its illegal trove with abandon—appear to make it one of the largest known book pirate sites in the world. IA publicly reports millions of dollars in revenue each year, including financial schemes that support its infringement design.
In willfully ignoring the Copyright Act, IA conflates the separate markets and business models made possible by the statute’s incentives and protections, robbing authors and publishers of their ability to control the manner and timing of communicating their works to the public. IA not only conflates print books and eBooks, it ignores the well-established channels in which publishers do business with bookstores, e-commerce platforms, and libraries, including for print and eBook lending. As detailed in the complaint, IA makes no investment in creating the literary works it distributes and appears to give no thought to the impact of its efforts on the quality and vitality of the authorship that fuels the marketplace of ideas.
ReadersFirst has previously posted links suggestion that Controlled Digital Lending has a legal basis. We suggest viewing this page to become aware of the issue: https://controlleddigitallending.org/
One question in this suit is whether the AAP members are suing over the IA’s National Emergency Library (https://archive.org/details/nationalemergencylibrary ), which expanded access to titles, or all Controlled Digital Lending, as practiced in the IA’s Open Library. If the former, we may await the outcome. if the latter, then librarians have reason for concern: CDL offers a way to expand our digital collections within copyright and offer access to titles not offered in digital format by publishers. We should stand with the IA in that event. The publishers have things their way too often, foisting pricey licenses with poor terms for libraries, and we cannot afford to see our ability to provide and ensure the preservation of works be further eroded.
Could this suit lead a reconsideration of the rights to digital works favorable to consumers and libraries? We can hope.