Podcast [2 hours, 3 minutes], Robert Darnton and Susan Flannery: "Digitizing the Culture of Print: The Digital Public Library of America and Other Urgent Projects", 11/2/12

Podcast [2 hours, 3 minutes], Robert Darnton and Susan Flannery: "Digitizing the Culture of Print: The Digital Public Library of America and Other Urgent Projects" : ""The role of the library in the digital age is one of the compelling questions of our era. How are libraries coping with the promise and perils of our impending digital future? What urgent initiatives are underway to assure universal access to our print inheritance and to the digital communication forms of the future? How is the very idea of the library changing? These and related questions will engage our distinguished panelists, who represent both research and public libraries and two of whom serve on the steering committee for the Digital Public Library of America. Robert Darnton is Carl H. Pforzheimer University Professor at Harvard, Director of the Harvard University Library and one of America's most distinguished historians. He serves on the steering committee of the Digital Public Library of America and has been a trustee of the New York Public Library since 1995. In a recent essay in the New York Review of Books, Darnton defended a NYPL plan to liquidate some branches in the system while renovating the main Fifth Avenue branch. The essay sparked a number of responses. In November of last year, Darnton provided a status report on the DPLA. Darnton is the author of many influential books including The Case for Books, Past, Present, and Future and The Great Cat Massacre. Susan Flannery is director of libraries for the City of Cambridge and past president of the Massachusetts Library Association."

‘U’ wins copyright lawsuit against Hathitrust digitalization project; Michigan Daily, 10/11/12

Austen Hufford, Michigan Daily; ‘U’ wins copyright lawsuit against Hathitrust digitalization project: "The judge wrote that the case may set an important precedent for future digital copyright laws, noting there are comparatively few prior standards regarding digitization and its fair use. “I cannot imagine a definition of fair use that would not encompass the transformative uses made by (the Hathitrust program) and would require that I terminate this invaluable contribution to the progress of science … ” Baer wrote. When someone uses the database to search a word in a copyrighted book, the full text is not available; only the page number and number of occurrences in the book is shown. The defendants claimed this does not infringe on copyright law because copyrighted books cannot be read in their entirety through the Hathitrust system. The system is also used for preserving physical texts in case the originals are somehow lost or destroyed. It already contains nearly 10 million volumes and about 73 percent of those are copyrighted, the ruling stated."

With Key Filings in, Trials Loom In Google Book Cases; Publishers Weekly, 8/3/12

Andrew Albanese, Publishers Weekly; With Key Filings in, Trials Loom In Google Book Cases:

"With the battle lines now drawn, how is the fight shaping up? At this stage, observers say, the Authors Guild may be facing an uphill charge. “Google and HathiTrust have made a compelling case that digitization to support full-text search and long-term preservation is a fair use,” New York Law School professor James Grimmelmann told PW. On the other hand, he notes, in the HathiTrust case at least, the Authors Guild has simply not made “a convincing case” that there is harm to the copyright owners."

How Fair Use Can Help Solve the Orphan Works Problem; 6/18/12

Jennifer Urban, Berkeley Technology Law Journal; How Fair Use Can Help Solve the Orphan Works Problem:

"This Article argues that legislation is not necessary to enable some uses of orphan works by nonprofit libraries and archives. Instead, the fair use doctrine in United States copyright law provides a partial solution. The Article addresses three basic questions: first, does fair use provide a viable basis on which libraries might digitize orphans? Second, does fair use provide a viable basis on which to make these orphans available to patrons or the public? Third, more generally, can or should fair use do any additional work in infringement analysis where the copyrighted work in question is an orphan?

The answer to each of these questions is yes."

The Google Book Settlement and the Fair Use Counterfactual; Social Science Research Network, 7/22/09

Matthew Sag, DePaul University College of Law via Social Science Research Network; The Google Book Settlement and the Fair Use Counterfactual:

"Abstract:

This Article compares the Settlement to the most likely outcome of the litigation the settlement resolves. The counterfactual I explore in some detail assumes that the court would have found that the digitization necessary to construct the Google book search engine was protected by copyright law’s fair use doctrine. Although this issue is now unlikely to be litigated, it is nonetheless essential to almost any frame of analysis of the Settlement.

I argue that the fair use issues in relation to the Google Book Search Library Project have been largely misunderstood. Although Google had a very strong set of arguments relating to fair use, it was not likely to receive the courts unqualified approval for its massive digitization effort. Instead, the most likely outcome of the litigation was that book digitization would qualify as a fair use so long as copyright owners were given the opportunity to opt out of inclusion in the book database and that opportunity was made freely available at a cost that was essentially trivial.

From this perspective, the terms of the settlement did not differ significantly from the most likely outcome of the litigation. Essentially, the opt out that fair use would likely have required has been replaced by the ability of copyright owners to opt out of the class-action settlement and the significant opt-out and modification opportunities within the settlement itself.

This Article contains a detailed discussion of the terms of the Settlement. "

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1437812