Court: Book Scanning Is Obviously Fair Use
from the not-even-close dept
Well, well. I had a post all written up that I was going to publish today about how the settling of the Publishers lawsuit against Google over book scanning had one downside -- that we didn't get a full court ruling on the question of whether or not the book scanning project constituted fair use. I have to now scrap that post, because before I had a chance to finish it off, the judge in a similar/related case -- filed by the Authors Guild against HathiTrust, a consortium of universities trying to digitize their libraries -- ruled that the book scanning effort was obviously fair use. Judge Harold Baer is pretty explicit that this is absolutely fair use when you look at the details:Although I recognize that the facts here may on some levels be without precedent, I am convinced that they fall safely within the protection of fair use such that there is no genuine issue of material fact. I cannot imagine a definition of fair use that would not encompass the transformative uses made by Defendants’ MDP and would require that I terminate this invaluable contribution to the progress of science and cultivation of the arts that at the same time effectuates the ideals espoused by the ADA.In other words, when you look at this project, it should be obvious that it's advancing the public good in many ways, and thus, promoting the progress. The judge relies heavily on one of my favorite fair use cases that I often use to debunk false ideas that some people have about fair use. Those who don't know the law, often insist that there can be no fair use if either (a) the entire work is used or (b) it's used in a commercial setting. Yet, as the Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley case showed, neither point needs to be true (even if they may weigh on how the fair use factors are considered). In this case, even if there were commercial elements and the entire works were "used" in that they were scanned, the court said that this use was obviously transformational in a useful manner.
A transformative use may be one that actually changes the original work. However, a transformative use can also be one that serves an entirely different purpose.... The use to which the works in the HDL are put is transformative because the copies serve an entirely different purpose than the original works: the purpose is superior search capabilities rather than actual access to copyrighted material. The search capabilities of the HDL have already given rise to new methods of academic inquiry such as text miningThe judge also, thankfully, noted that just because HathiTrust didn't "add anything new" to the work itself "misses the point" because each scan "serves a different function than the original work."
The judge also rejected the whole claim that the scanning "impacts the market" for the works -- which is the other key factor. While some like to pretend that any activity "impacts the market" because any use limits the possibility of a license, the court (thankfully) recognizes that such an argument is ridiculously broad and makes no sense. Furthermore, he notes that the plaintiffs have to show real harm is likely, and they completely failed to do so here.
Of course, the details in the Google book scanning suit are somewhat different -- in that the use is more clearly commercial, and a greater amount of the book is made available. However, as James Grimmelmann notes, the "near complete victory" for HathiTrust with this ruling does not bode well for the Authors Guild case against Google, and increases the likelihood of an out of court settlement.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: book scanning, fair use, transformative
Companies: authors guild, google, hathitrust
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
The trust provides full-text searches only with a rights holder’s permission, and gives full-text access for readers with “certified print disabilities,” Baer said.
....
Google made a deal in 2005 with these universities to scan millions of books in their libraries without the rights holders’ permission, and make “snippets” of those books available online via Google’s search engine.
---------- end snip
But that's not the blanket doing away with copyright that you SEEM to propose, MIke. If my take on your views is wrong, it's only because you nowhere explicitly state them. You ARE pleased with Google's gobbling up here, do advocate "monetizing" any work that one can get hold of without direct legal responsibility, plus mixed in is others here definitely advocate outright seizure of works for whatever "sharing" they choose, which IS violation of copyright in practical terms. So I conclude you're a pirate.
Even so, IF the obvious slippery slope ended at THIS pretty clear fair use, it'd be fine. But it won't. Having won so far, the Google monster will just assimilate more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
lol
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
Correct me if I'm wrong, which I probably am, since you haven't satisfied my expectation that you answer my questions, because you don't have to, because no one has to answer anyone else's questions if they don't want to, and it ultimately doesn't matter what you think of what Mike thinks because your rants just end up making Mike look better because it appears he's pissing off people who make absurd arguments in support of a corrupt system just by sharing his opinions, so he seems to be doing something right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
Now that's funny! Mike (and the other posters) frequently, clearly and explicitly state their views every day. That your take on his views are wrong (and they obviously are) is not because his views are some kind of secret.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, under the following conditions it IS fair use:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Court: Book Scanning Is Obviously Fair Use
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Court: Book Scanning Is Obviously Fair Use
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Balancing Test?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Judgement also emphasizes transformative use for unsighted readers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How does this ruling apply to video and audio works?
What about playlists? Those are transformative works with stand-alone artistic merit. Playlists were the primary value of Demonoid (at least for me).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How does this ruling apply to video and audio works?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually, I think that this ruling gives the authors even more ammo against Google, because a line needs to be draw between commercial and non-commercial uses. Google's use is entirely commercial, they want to increase their ad views.
I am thinking this ruling will likely get appealed, and there is plenty of potential legal action on the issues of multiple uses and use outside of the library confines, distribution, and the like.
I don't think this is a true grand slam, rather it confirms a pretty narrow use, not anything wide scale.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So fair use was found to apply in this case, does not for a second that it will mean it will apply to other cases or other ruling or to google.
if you masnick cannot work out why one ruling will go one way and another ruling another way because the facts of each case is different, you need not be making comment on it.
but you just keep on banging away hoping you'll find someone other people out of the millions of people on the new with similar warped concepts of reality..
This has nothing to do with google or it's case, you cannot see the difference between commercial use and for education ??
that speaks far more about your education than that of the courts..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
no subject
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]