this post was submitted on 14 May 2023
29 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37608 readers
207 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JasBC@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

As someone said on a Reddit-thread on this - IA was buying physical copies of newly published books, photoscanning them, and then through the "Emergency Library"-program, granting (at the time) perpetual access to users in excess of the number of purchased books; that a judge (however biased) would side with the publishers against IA in this case was basically a foregone conclusion based on how copyright law works.

Before they initiated this program they did loan out these photoscans, but only to as many borrowers as they owned copies of books, which made it some kind of grey area that wasn't enough of a bother for the publishers to care about. By not thinking through the "Emergency Library" at all before initiating it, IA has put their whole operation of lending photoscans in jeopardy as the judge in charge of the case thinks it's copyright infringement.