Amicus Briefs Filed in Internet Archive Copyright Case; Publishers Weekly, March 25, 2024

Andrew Albanese , Publishers Weekly; Amicus Briefs Filed in Internet Archive Copyright Case

"Internet Archive lawyers filed their principal appeal brief on December 15, and 11 amicus briefs were filed in support of the Internet Archive a week later, in December, representing librarians and library associations, authors, public advocacy groups, law professors, and IP scholars, although some of the IA amicus briefs are presented as neutral.

The briefs are the latest development in the long-running copyright infringement case and come a year after a ruling by judge John G. Koeltl on March 24, 2023 that emphatically rejected the IA’s fair use defense, finding the scanning and lending of print library books under a protocol known as “controlled digital lending” to be copyright infringement.

The Internet Archive’s reply brief is now due on April 19, and oral arguments are expected to be set for this fall."

AI is learning from stolen intellectual property. It needs to stop.; The Washington Post, October 19, 2023

William D. Cohan , The Washington Post; AI is learning from stolen intellectual property. It needs to stop.

"The other day someone sent me the searchable database published by Atlantic magazine of more than 191,000 e-books that have been used to train the generative AI systems being developed by Meta, Bloomberg and others. It turns out that four of my seven books are in the data set, called Books3. Whoa.

Not only did I not give permission for my books to be used to generate AI products, but I also wasn’t even consulted about it. I had no idea this was happening. Neither did my publishers, Penguin Random House (for three of the books) and Macmillan (for the other one). Neither my publishers nor I were compensated for use of my intellectual property. Books3 just scraped the content away for free, with Meta et al. profiting merrily along the way. And Books3 is just one of many pirated collections being used for this purpose...

This is wholly unacceptable behavior. Our books are copyrighted material, not free fodder for wealthy companies to use as they see fit, without permission or compensation. Many, many hours of serious research, creative angst and plain old hard work go into writing and publishing a book, and few writers are compensated like professional athletes, Hollywood actors or Wall Street investment bankers. Stealing our intellectual property hurts."

Publishers settle copyright infringement lawsuit with ResearchGate; Chemistry World, September 18, 2023

REBECCA TRAGER, Chemistry World ; Publishers settle copyright infringement lawsuit with ResearchGate

"Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe, a librarian and professor of information science at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, says the settlement agreement ‘signals that ResearchGate has completed its journey from disrupter to partner within the scholarly communications ecosystem’. She notes that Elsevier and ACS have been using ResearchGate’s content blocking technology since at least early 2022, which indicates that ‘a more collaborative relationship’ has been in development for some time."

Bizarre AI-generated products are in stores. Here’s how to avoid them.; The Washington Post, September 18, 2023

 Heather Kelly, The Washington Post; Bizarre AI-generated products are in stores. Here’s how to avoid them.

"Copyright and intellectual property issues around AI are still in the air...

The Authors Guild, which represents many authors whose work has been used to train AI tools, is asking for legislation and pushing companies to disclose when a book is written by AI...

“We see it as consumer protection, but it’s also a way to insulate the book marketplace because otherwise, you’ll just see an influx of AI-generated content on a platform like Kindle,” said Mary Rasenberger, chief executive of the Authors Guild. “It will take away from the market [demand] for human creative works.”

Rasenberger said that she doesn’t think AI can be held off forever and even sees a place for it as a useful tool for writers. The guild’s goal is to make sure AI is regulated, licensed and legitimate, with money going back to authors, she said."

Four large US publishers sue ‘shadow library’ for alleged copyright infringement; The Guardian, September 15, 2023

Ella Creamer, The Guardian ; Four large US publishers sue ‘shadow library’ for alleged copyright infringement

"Four leading US publishers have sued an online “shadow library” that allows visitors to download textbooks and other copyrighted materials free.

Cengage, Macmillan Learning, McGraw Hill and Pearson Education filed the suit against Library Genesis, also known as LibGen, in Manhattan federal court, citing “extensive violations” of copyright law.

LibGen operates a collection of different domains that allow users to search for and download pdf versions of books. The suit, filed on Thursday, said LibGen holds more than 20,000 files published by the four suing companies."

Internet Archive Files Appeal in Copyright Infringement Case; Publishers Weekly, September 11, 2023

 Andrew Albanese, Publishers Weekly ; Internet Archive Files Appeal in Copyright Infringement Case

"As expected, the Internet Archive this week submitted its appeal in Hachette v. Internet Archive, the closely-watched copyright case involving the scanning and digital lending of library books.

In a brief notice filed with the court, IA lawyers are seeking review by the Second Circuit court of appeals in New York of the "August 11, 2023 Judgment and Permanent Injunction; the March 24, 2023 Opinion and Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Denying Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment; and from any and all orders, rulings, findings, and/or conclusions adverse to Defendant Internet Archive."

The notice of appeal comes right at the 30-day deadline—a month to the day after judge John G. Koeltl approved and entered a negotiated consent judgment in the case which declared the IA's scanning and lending program to be copyright infringement, as well as a permanent injunctionthat, among its provisions, bars the IA from lending unauthorized scans of the plaintiffs' in-copyright, commercially available books that are available in digital editions."

Judge Approves Final Injunction in Publishers, Internet Archive Copyright Case; Publishers Weekly, August 15, 2023

 Andrew Albanese , Publishers Weekly; Judge Approves Final Injunction in Publishers, Internet Archive Copyright Case

"After more than three years of litigation, it took judge John G. Koeltl just hours to sign off on the parties’ negotiated consent judgment—but not without a final twist. In a short written opinion made public yesterday, Koeltl sided with the Internet Archive in a final dispute, limiting the scope of the permanent injunction to cover only the plaintiffs’ print books that also have electronic editions available."

Judgment Entered in Publishers, Internet Archive Copyright Case; Publishers Weekly, August 14, 2023

  Andrew Albanese, Publishers Weekly; Judgment Entered in Publishers, Internet Archive Copyright Case

"More than four months after a federal judge found the Internet Archive liable for copyright infringement for its program to scan and lend library books, the parties have delivered a negotiated agreement for a judgment to be entered in the case. But a final resolution in the case could still be many months, if not years, away, as Internet Archive officials have vowed to appeal.

The jointly proposed agreement includes a declaration that cements the key finding from Judge John G. Koeltl’s March 24 summary judgment decision: that the IA's unauthorized scanning and lending of the 127 in-suit copyrighted books under a novel protocol known as “controlled digital lending” constitutes copyright infringement, including in the IA's controversial "National Emergency Library" (under which the IA temporarily allowed for simultaneous access to its collections of scans in the the early days of the pandemic, when schools and libraries were shuttered).

The proposed agreement also includes a permanent injunction that would, among its provisions, bar the IA’s lending of unauthorized scans of the plaintiffs' in-copyright, commercially available books, as well as bar the IA from “profiting from” or “inducing” any other party’s “infringing" copying, distribution, or display of the the plaintiffs' books "in any digital or electronic form.” Under the agreement, the injunction will not be stayed while the case is on appeal—essentially meaning that once notified the IA will have to stop making unauthorized scans of the plaintiff Publishers' copyrighted works available to be borrowed. Meanwhile, AAP officials said a "side agreement" with the IA will motivate the IA to similarly resolve issues with other non-plaintiff AAP member publishers. 

The parties left one final dispute for Koeltl to clean up, however: what books will be “covered” by the proposed injunction?"

Film and music industries on edge: AI's growing influence stirs fear of job displacement, copyright issues; KATU2ABC, August 8, 2023

KONNER MCINTIRE and JANAE BOWENS , KATU2ABC; Film and music industries on edge: AI's growing influence stirs fear of job displacement, copyright issues

"Currently, the Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act provides some protection to musicians. It was made law in 2018 and helps to ensure musicians are fairly compensated by publishers.

The law directly addresses piracy which has cost artists billions of dollars.

Five years later, Congressional leaders, including Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.,who serves as the Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, are concerned the law will not protect musicians against AI.

“For Congress, we’re now looking at old challenges with new dangers, including the ever-present threat of piracy as well as artificial intelligence, which pose still unknown questions for intellectual property protection efforts even as they open doors to a new world of technological capability that is, at present, limitless,” the congressman recently wrote in an op-ed.“If we don’t get AI right, it could very well render not only the Music Modernization Act obsolete – but also the policy choices we make next.”"

Academic Book About Emojis Can’t Include The Emojis It Talks About Because Of Copyright; Techdirt, August 4, 2023

Mike Masnick, Techdirt ; Academic Book About Emojis Can’t Include The Emojis It Talks About Because Of Copyright

"Sounds interesting enough, but as Goldman highlights with an image from the book, Kiaer was apparently unable to actually show examples of many of the emoji she was discussing due to copyright fears. While companies like Twitter and Google have offered up their own emoji sets under open licenses, not all of them have, and some of the specifics about the variations in how different companies represent different emoji apparently were key to the book...

Now, my first reaction to this is that using the emoji and stickers and whatnot in the book seems like a very clear fair use situation. But… that requires a publisher willing to take up the fight (and an insurance company behind the publisher willing to finance that fight). And, that often doesn’t happen. Publishers are notoriously averse to supporting fair use, because they don’t want to get sued.

But, really, this just ends up highlighting (once again) the absolute ridiculousness of copyright in the modern world. No one in their right mind would think that a book about emoji is somehow harming the market for whatever emoji or stickers the professor wished to include. Yet, due to the nature of copyright, here we are. With an academic book about emoji that can’t even include the emoji being spoken about."

Judgment Phase of Internet Archive Copyright Case Appears Imminent; Publishers Weekly, August 1, 2023

 Andrew Albanese, Publishers Weekly; Judgment Phase of Internet Archive Copyright Case Appears Imminent

"It's now been more than four months since a federal judge found the Internet Archive liable for copyright infringement for its program to scan and lend library books. But after a court order late last week, the parties finally appear headed toward the judgment phase of the litigation.

Since the verdict, the parties have (per the court's order) been conferring over the contours an "appropriate procedure to determine the judgment to be entered in the case." And after numerous extensions through the spring and summer, judge John G. Koeltl appears to have run out of patience. In a July 28 order, Koeltl gave the parties until August 11 to deliver their recommendations, adding "no more extensions."

Thousands of authors urge AI companies to stop using work without permission; Morning Edition, NPR, July 17, 2023

Chloe Veltman, Morning Edition NPR; Thousands of authors urge AI companies to stop using work without permission

"Thousands of writers including Nora Roberts, Viet Thanh Nguyen, Michael Chabon and Margaret Atwood have signed a letter asking artificial intelligence companies like OpenAI and Meta to stop using their work without permission or compensation."

Editors quit top neuroscience journal to protest against open-access charges; Nature, April 21, 2023

Katharine Sanderson, Nature; Editors quit top neuroscience journal to protest against open-access charges

"More than 40 editors have resigned from two leading neuroscience journals in protest against what the editors say are excessively high article-processing charges (APCs) set by the publisher. They say that the fees, which publishers use to cover publishing services and in some cases make money, are unethical. The publisher, Dutch company Elsevier, says that its fees provide researchers with publishing services that are above average quality for below average price. The editors plan to start a new journal hosted by the non-profit publisher MIT Press.

The decision to resign came about after many discussions among the editors, says Stephen Smith, a neuroscientist at the University of Oxford, UK, and editor-in-chief of one of the journals, NeuroImage. “Everyone agreed that the APC was unethical and unsustainable,” says Smith, who will lead the editorial team of the new journal, Imaging Neuroscience, when it launches.

The 42 academics who made up the editorial teams at NeuroImage and its companion journal NeuroImage: Reports announced their resignations on 17 April. The journals are open access and require authors to pay a fee for publishing services. The APC for NeuroImage is US$3,450; NeuroImage: Reports charges $900, which will double to $1,800 from 31 May. Elsevier, based in Amsterdam, says that the APCs cover the costs associated with publishing an article in an open-access journal, including editorial and peer-review services, copyediting, typesetting archiving, indexing, marketing and administrative costs. Andrew Davis, Elsevier’s vice-president of corporate communications, says that NeuroImage’s fee is less than that of the nearest comparable journal in its field, and that the publisher’s APCs are “set in line with our policy [of] providing above average quality for below average price”."

Publishers beat Internet Archive as judge rules e-book lending violates copyright; Ars Technica, March 27, 2023

ASHLEY BELANGER, Ars Technica; Publishers beat Internet Archive as judge rules e-book lending violates copyright

Internet Archive: Judge’s copyright ruling is a “blow to all libraries.”

"On Friday, a US district judge ruled in favor of book publishers suing the Internet Archive (IA) for copyright infringement. The IA’s Open Library project—which partners with libraries to scan print books in their collections and offer them as lendable e-books—had no right to reproduce 127 of the publishers’ books named in the suit, judge John Koeltl decided."

Why the Internet Archive’s copyright battle is likely to come to a very bad end; Media Nation, March 21, 2023

DAN KENNEDY, Media Nation ; Why the Internet Archive’s copyright battle is likely to come to a very bad end

"The Archive ramped up its lending during the COVID-19 pandemic and has not cut back even though life has more or less returned to normal. The Archive argues that it’s doing what any library does — it’s lending books that it owns, and it’s controlling how many people can borrow a book at any given time. In other words, it’s not simply making electronic versions of its books available for mass download. That may show some desire to act responsibly on the Archive’s part, but that doesn’t make it legal."

Book publishers with surging profits struggle to prove Internet Archive hurt sales; Ars Technica, March 20, 2023

ASHLEY BELANGER , Ars Technica; Book publishers with surging profits struggle to prove Internet Archive hurt sales

"Today, the Internet Archive (IA) defended its practice of digitizing books and lending those e-books for free to users of its Open Library. In 2020, four of the wealthiest book publishers sued IA, alleging this kind of digital lending was actually “willful digital piracy” causing them “massive harm.”"

The Internet Archive Is a Library; Inside Higher Ed, March 17, 2023

Dave Hansen, Deborah Jakubs, Chris Bourg, Thomas Leonard, Jeff MacKie-Mason, Joseph A. Salem Jr., MacKenzie Smith, and Winston Tabb, Inside Higher Ed; The Internet Archive Is a Library

"Why is it so important to the publishers that the Internet Archive not be identified as a library? Primarily because Congress has long recognized the valuable role that libraries play in our copyright system and has created special allowances in the law for their work. In this suit, the publishers seek to redefine the Internet Archive on their own terms and, in so doing, deny it the ability to leverage the same legal tools that thousands of other libraries use to lend and disseminate materials to our users.

The argument that the Internet Archive isn’t a library is wrong. If this argument is accepted, the results would jeopardize the future development of digital libraries nationwide. The Internet Archive is the most significant specialized library to emerge in decades. It is one of the only major memory institutions to be created from the emergence of the internet. It is, and continues to be, a modern-day cultural institution built intentionally in response to the technological revolution through which we’ve lived."

From Roald Dahl to Goosebumps, revisions to children’s classics are really about copyright – a legal expert explains; The Conversation, March 7, 2023

Cathay Smith, Professor of Law, University of Montana; Visiting Research Fellow, University of Oxford, The Conversation ; From Roald Dahl to Goosebumps, revisions to children’s classics are really about copyright – a legal expert explains

"The backlash to Puffin Books’ decision to update Roald Dahl’s children’s books has been swift and largely derisive. The publisher has been accused of “absurd censorship”, “corporate safetyism” and “cultural vandalism.” 

At its core, however, updating Roald Dahl’s children’s books is really about the rights and control copyright grants to authors and copyright holders. Those rights are exercised to update children’s books more frequently than many of these critics may realise."

Oral Argument Set in Internet Archive Copyright Case; Publishers Weekly, February 21, 2023

Andrew Albanese, Publishers Weekly; Oral Argument Set in Internet Archive Copyright Case

"The contentious copyright case has engaged a wide range of stakeholders, with amicus briefs filed on both sides."

Who Owns Bob Woodward's Trump Interview Recordings?; Law360, February 1, 2023

 Hannah Albaraz, Law360 ; Who Owns Bob Woodward's Trump Interview Recordings?

""Best practice," Reid said, "is to get a release or transfer [of] rights at the outset. The complaint suggests this didn't happen."

Reid, who co-chairs UNC Chapel Hill's Center for Media Law and Policy, said the complaint doesn't paint a full picture of what exactly the parties agreed to before the interviews. She said she is interested to see how Woodward and his publishers respond to Trump's claim seeking declaratory relief regarding ownership of copyrights.

Trump's complaint cites no legal precedent, but it does reference the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, which states that if an interviewer or an interviewee seeks to register a copyright for an interview, the individual must have the other person transfer over his or her ownership rights.

The complaint doesn't suggest that either Woodward or Trump did so.

It may be that the U.S. Copyright Office would consider both Trump and Woodward the owners of their respective parts of the interview, and if so, a court may find that Woodward owes Trump some portion of the proceeds from the audiobook.

However, there is at least one case dealing with the ownership of interviews in which a court has held that the interviewer is the copyright owner of an interview."