Brief of the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of San Diego and Imperial Counties, the American Library Association, the Association of Research Libraries, the American Association of Law Libraries, the Medical Library Association, the Law Library Association, the Internet Archive, and Project Gutenberg as amici curiae in support of respondents.
On Friday, November 13, 2009, Google, the Authors Guild, and the Association of American Publishers filed an Amended Settlement Agreement (ASA) in the copyright infringement litigation concerning the Google Library Project. The amendments proposed by the parties are designed to address objections made by the U.S. Department of Justice and copyright holders to the original proposed settlement agreement. While many of the amendments will have little direct impact on libraries, the ASA significantly reduces the scope of the settlement because it excludes most books published outside of the United States. This paper describes the ASA's major changes, with emphasis on those changes relevant to libraries.
In a highly publicized decision issued on September 8, 2008, US District Court Judge Robert Patterson ruled that Steven Vander Ark's Harry Potter Lexicon infringed J.K. Rowling's copyright. Although J. K. Rowling prevailed in the litigation, the big winner actually was fair use.
Brief Amici Curiae of the American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries, and the Association of Research Libraries in Support of Petitioner.
The American Library Association, the Association of Research Libraries, and the Association of College and Research Libraries (the Library Associations) submit these comments to address developments relating to the proposed Settlement that have arisen since the Library Associations filed their initial comments with this Court on May 4, 2009. In particular, these comments discuss the amendment Google and the University of Michigan (Michigan) entered into on May 20, 2009 that expanded the 2004 agreement that allowed Google to scan books in the Michigan library for inclusion in Google's search database.
On Friday, May 11, 2012, Judge Orinda Evans released her 350-page opinion in the copyright infringement lawsuit against Georgia State University. This issue brief summarizes the key rulings in the case and discusses some possible consequences for libraries generally.
On March 22, 2011, Judge Denny Chin rejected the proposed settlement in copyright infringement litigation over the Google Library Project. Judge Chin found that the settlement was not "fair, reasonable, and adequate" as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Judge Chin issued the decision over a year after the fairness hearing he conducted. His opinion agrees in large measure with the objections to the settlement asserted by the U.S. Department of Justice at the hearing and in its written submissions. This paper discusses the opinion and where it leaves Google Books Search.
Joint Comments Submitted on Behalf of American Library Association, Association of Research Libraries, Center for Democracy & Technology, Champaign-Urbana Community Wireless Network, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Media Access Project, The Rutherford Institute, and the Voice On The Net (Von) Coalition.
On December 13, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Costco v. Omega in a manner that eliminated none of the uncertainty caused by the lower court's ruling in that case. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had ruled that the copyright law's "first sale doctrine" did not apply to copies manufactured abroad. This ruling cast doubt on a library's ability to circulate books and other materials manufactured outside of the United States.
The ALA and ARL thank the Library of Congress (LOC) for proposing to amend its regulations governing mandatory deposit of electronic works published in the United States and available only online under 37 CFR § 202.19(c)(5). ALA and ARL recognize that significant technological advances have been made and as such, believe this initiative to preserve and provide access to journal literature is extremely important, especially in light of the increasing number of journals being published only online.