A Guide for the Perplexed Part III: The Amended Settlement Agreement
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.
Supplemental Library Association Comments on the Proposed Google Books Settlement
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.
In the Matter of Mandatory Deposit of Published Electronic Works Available Only Online: Comments of ALA and ARL
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.
Oral Testimony of Jonathan Band on Behalf of ALA, ACRL, and ARL on Renewal and Expansion of the Film Clip Compilation Exemption to the DMCA Section 1201 Prohibition on Circumvention of Access Control Technologies
The Authors Guild, Inc., Association of American Publishers, Inc., et al., v. Google Inc.
Library association comments on the proposed settlement.
How Fair Use Prevailed in the Harry Potter Case
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.
A Victory For Media Neutrality: The Eleventh Circuit's En Banc Decision in Greenberg v. National Geographic Society (Jul. 9, 2008)
Sitting en banc, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on June 30, 2008, decided Greenberg v. National Geographic Society, finding that the CD-ROM set, "The Complete National Geographic" (CNG), was a privileged revision of a collective work under 17 U.S.C. § 201(c) and not a "new collective work" in violation of Mr. Greenberg's copyrights. This case is in line with the Second Circuit's decision in Faulkner v. National Geographic Enters., further clarified the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in New York Times Co. v. Tasini, and importantly, upheld the "long embraced doctrine of media neutrality" that the "transfer of a work between media does not alter the character of that work for copyright purposes."
Greenberg v. National Geographic Society: Amicus Brief in support of National Geographic Society
Two photographers claimed that the inclusion of their photographs in the National Geographic Society's (NGS) CD-ROM version of the NGS magazine violated their copyrights and that the NGS was not exempt under Section 201(c) of the Copyright Act.
Greenberg v. National Geographic Society, Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Jun. 13, 2007)
This case presents the question of whether Section 201(c) of the Copyright Act accords a magazine publisher a privilege to produce a digital compilation that contains exact images of its past magazine issues.
In the Matter of Digital Broadcast Copy Protection
Comments arguing that a broadcast flag rule adopted by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) could effectively limit the public's access to information, and impair its ability to use content in new and innovative ways.