Publishers, Internet Archive Trade Reply Briefs in Book Scanning Case - Publishers Weekly

Today's trip into the Catosphere took Panzer to the Publishers Weekly site. There with a little digging in the posts our intrepid traveling kitty found one about the latest developments in publishers Hachette, HarperCollins, Wiley, and Penguin Random House's  copyright infringement case against the Internet Archive (IA). IA has been scanning hardback copies of books and then "lending" the scanned copies to people (and libraries) without paying publishers or authors.

 

So, we wait until October.

According to Andrew Albanese's post, the publishers and IA have filed their reply briefs to the Summary Judgement requests both presented to the court earlier this year. (In a previous post Panzer explained about the publishers' and IA's Summary Judgement requests.) The publishers' attorneys presented a 41-page reply to IA's request for a Summary Judgement in IA's favor and IA's attorneys presented a 41-page reply to the publishers' request for a Summary Judgement in the publishers' favor. The post quotes extensively from both reply briefs. Basically, the publishers brief says IA is a piracy site, not a library and IA's brief says publishers are trying to keep libraries from lending scanned books. On October 7 the publishers and IA will have the opportunity to submit reply briefs to these reply briefs.

 

Panzer says, "This little kitty didn't know Internet Archive was giving these scanned books out worldwide."

 

Note: This is a very, very, very long post. Bring a thermos of tea, a sandwich and a muffin for today's reading selection.

 

To read the post tootle over to Publishers vs. Internet Archive

To read Panzer's previous post tootle over to Summary Judgement