We have talked a lot about the Internet Archive because it is one of the most varied and comprehensive options for getting certain network resources, such as pictures, music, games or books, between other. But a library of this magnitude is no exception to copyright accusations, and now four major publishers sued the Internet Archive for allegedly violating the laws in this regard.
A problem they have faced for years, sometimes with false accusations, and which is now part of four major publishing houses in the United States. The lawsuit was filed in the Federal Court in New York and is based on the fact that make digital copies of books public and therefore “violate the Copyright Act”, as they claim.
Tired of complainers
The Internet Archive (IA) added to this avalanche of free content that we were able to enjoy during the weeks of containment due to the coronavirus. Specifically, it was provided free of charge 1.4 million pounds by suspending the waiting lists for their digital copies, a queue that they make (and will do at the end of this offer) to respect copyright (by only lending e-books as many of people that the licenses in this book have).
But although they are somewhat temporary, they said, at least some publishers have not viewed this development favorably, and now that quarantine states are being diluted in some countries by de-escalation (including some US states) . .), it is when they filed the lawsuit that we have cited. Publishing houses are Demandeurs Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers LLC, John Wiley & Sons et Penguin Random House LLC, who argues that “without any license or payment to authors / publishers, IA scans printed books, uploads these illegal copies to its web servers, and distributes text copies of digital books” on an “extraordinary” scale and refers to Open the Library and Archive Domains .org.
I mean, your point is that the distribution of all these copies of books violates copyright. Something they support from the American Publishers Association because, in the words of its president Maria A. Pallante, “It seems clear that IA intends to hammer home the legal framework around investments and transactions in the field. of copyright today ”
The deception of the accused
Brewster Kahlo, founder of IA, told Ars Technica that “as a library, IA buys and lends books, as libraries always have.” He called the request “disappointing”, adding that in a situation where schools, libraries and other public places where books are accessible or loaned are not accessible, this request “does not favor anyone”.
Internet Archive claims they are doing nothing but a library
In this situation it remains to be seen how the AI reacts, because, in principle, the distribution of copies of books without the author’s permission is illegal. They could take advantage of the argument previously used for book search engines (a doctrine in US copyright law called fair use) highlighting the exception to the measure we mentioned above for the quarantine, although these are very different cases because a search engine does not allow the work to be read as it happens with AI.