Showing posts with label Judge Orinda Evans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Judge Orinda Evans. Show all posts

Saturday, August 5, 2017

For Second Time, Appeals Court Hears GSU E-Reserves Case; Publishers Weekly, August 4, 2017

Andrew Albanese, Publishers Weekly; For Second Time, Appeals Court Hears GSU E-Reserves Case

"In what the plaintiff publishers’ attorney Bruce Rich called a “seemingly never-ending case,” an appeals court last week heard oral arguments in the long-running Georgia State University (GSU) e-reserves case for a second time. And judging by the court’s questions, the case could still be far from a conclusion.

In the hearing, which went for just over an hour, a three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit in Atlanta, once again pressed attorneys for the fault lines in the decade-old copyright case case, with much of the hearing focusing on whether Judge Orinda Evans correctly evaluated the fourth factor of the four factor fair use test (the effect on the market), and then properly weighted that factor in making her fair use determinations."

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

GSU e-Reserves Decision; Library Journal, 5/12/16

Kyle K. Courtney, Library Journal; GSU e-Reserves Decision:
"The infamous Georgia State University (GSU) e-reserves case (Cambridge University Press v. Patton) emerged last month from its long winter slumber to give us yet another 200+ page decision which librarians, lawyers, and publishers have begun to parse and analyze. And, like me, they are probably asking themselves: What does this decision actually mean?"

Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Publishers and Georgia State See Broad Implications in Copyright Ruling; Chronicle of Higher Education, 5/14/12

Jennifer Howard, Chronicle of Higher Education; Publishers and Georgia State See Broad Implications in Copyright Ruling: "The publisher plaintiffs in the closely watched lawsuit over Georgia State University's use of copyrighted material in electronic reserves say they are "disappointed" with much of the ruling handed down by a federal judge on Friday. But they made the best of it in statements issued Monday, playing up points on which the judge had agreed with them. And one plaintiff, Oxford University Press, said that the decision "marks a significant first step toward addressing the need for clarity around issues of copyright in the context of higher education.""