NEH Appeals Orders to Reinstate Grants - Pubishers Daily

Not a lot happening today.

Panzer's next stop was at the Publishers Daily site.

 

There our inquisitive kitty boy found a news release about the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and the grants they cancelled.

 

Panzer says, "Of course, they don't have to give the grants until the appeal is decided."

 

Note:This is a short post. You won't need anything to snack on.

 

To read the news release tootle over to NEH Grants 

Internet Archive Takes Another Blow in Court on Copyright - Publishing Perspectives

This is a really tiring subject.

While tootling around in the Catosphere Panzer found another chapter in the never-ending Internet Archive story at the Publishing Perspectives site.

According to Porter Anderson's post, the U.S. Second Court of Appeals has upheld the March decision that the Internet Archive (IA) committed copyright infringement against the publishers.which brought the lawsuit against IA. There are several links to more information about the IA lawsuit included in the post.

 

Panzer says, "The case began in 2020. Was decided against IA for copyright infringement earlier this year. IA filed an appeal of the decision. The decision was just upheld. Will IA admit it was wrong now? This little kitty is betting, 'No'."

.

Note:This is a long post with a lot of links to other information sites and posts. You'll need to decide what you want to snack on while you read

 

To read the post tootle over to  This Internet Archive

Amicus Briefs Filed in Internet Archive Copyright Case - Publishers Weekly

IA scanned books without permission. That's it.

Panzer found an interesting post at the Publishers Weekly site about the Internet Archive (IA) case in which the IA was found to have committed copyright infringement.

 

According to Andrew Albanese's post, the Internet Archive (IA) has filed it's appeal brief of the judge's decision, the publishers have filed their response brief, and groups which either support IA or the publishers have filed their briefs. The different group briefs for and against the decision are listed and quoted in the post. Links are included in the post.

 

Panzer says, "You'll need to read all those group briefs quotes. This is one of those cases that goes on forever."

 

Note: This is a long post. You'll need to decide what to bring to snack on while you read.

 

To read the post tootle over to Internet Archive Copyright Case

Publishers File Appeal Brief in Internet Archive Copyright Suit - Publishers Weekly

You'll save lawyer fees if you just accept the court decision.

Today, Panzer made a trip to the Publishers Weekly site. There with a little digging in the posts our intrepid kitty pilot found one about the Internet Archive (IA) case.

 

According to Jim Milliot's post, the publishers who won their copyright infringement lawsuit against the Internet Archive (IA) have filed a brief in response to IA's appeal to have the lawsuit decision overturned. Links to other posts about the case are included.

 

Panzer says, "IA is just trying to drag it out longer."

 

Note: This is a short-medium length post. Bring a cup of tea to drink while you read today.

 

To read the post tootle over to Internet Archive

Internet Archive Seeks Reversal in Book Scanning Suit - Publishers Weekly

Today Panzer made a stop at the Publishers Weekly site. With a little digging in the posts there he found one about the Internet Archive.

 

What's the point of copyright if they steal it anyway/

According to Andrew Albanese's post, the Internet Archive (IA) is appealing the decision against IA in the copyright infringement lawsuit brought by publishers. The lawyers for IA argue the judge in the case didn't understand IA's "controlled digital lending" defense. The post contains the four points the IA lawyers say prove their argument. Also included in the post are links to other information about IA and the case.

 

Panzer says, "You need to read the post yourself. The appeal is too convoluted for this little kitty to try to explain it all to you."

 

Note: This is a very long post. Bring a pot of tea, a chocolate muffin, a chocolate brownie, and a chocolate chip cookie (biscuit) for today's reading selection.

 

To read the post tootle over to Internet Archive

Amazon's Showdown in France Tests Its Ability to Sidestep Labor - The New York Times

Today as Panzer was cleaning out the Panzermobile, he found a post wadded up under the passenger seat. Flattening it out, our fastidious kitty discovered it was a post from The New York Times site about Amazon's labor problems in France.

I have my priorities.

The post by Liz Alderman and Adam Satariano documents problems with the French warehouse workers labor union. The union is not happy with Amazon's response to workers' health protection in the company's French fulfillment centers. The union took Amazon to court and won a court order that Amazon must stop delivering 'nonessential' items during the pandemic. In response Amazon closed their French fulfillment centers. Amazon is shipping orders from warehouses in other countries to French customers. There are more issues in the case and Amazon has appealed to the French Supreme Court.

Panzer says, "Umm ... Who decides what is nonessential? What's essential to the neighbor's dog wouldn't be essential to me. So, who decides? Me or the dog?"

This is a humongous post. Bring a thermos of tea and six muffins for today's reading selection.

To read the post tootle over to Amazon and French Unions

Supreme Court Rejects Apple's Appeal - PW (Publishers' Weekly)

Panzer was out tootling around in the Catosphere today, when the Panzermobile was buffeted by a huge gust of wind. Going in the direction the wind had come from, took our brave kitty boy to the Publishers' Weekly site. It took no digging at all to find a post about the results of Apple's petition to United States Supreme Court.

Panzer discovered the buffeting wind that hit the Panzermobile had actually been a collective sigh of relief. Our kitty boy told you back in January that Apple had appealed their conviction of ebook price-fixing to the U.S. Supreme Court. According to a post by Andrew Albanese, the Supreme Court rejected Apple's appeal, finally bringing the case to a close. This means Apple will now be responsible for paying $400 million in refunds to ebook buyers.

Okay. Clean up your mess now.

The case has stretched on since beginning in 2011, when Apple was first accused of ebook price-fixing. Since being found guilty of price-fixing in 2013, Apple has used every means their attorneys could come up with to avoid the court financial settlement. Now, in addition to the refund to ebook buyers Apple also will pay $50 million in legal costs to their attorneys.

Panzer says, "Hmm ... If you humans would have listen to this little kitty and paid the money to the ebook buyers three years ago, you could have saved most of those attorney fees."

Note: This is a long post with links to other posts included in it. You'll need a thermos of tea and six muffins for your reading. If you want to read Panzer's post from January too, add two more muffins.

To read the post about the Supreme Court decision, tootle over to Apple appeal

To read Panzer's post about Apple's appeal, tootle over to Apple Supreme Court appeal

 

Apple E-book Price-fixing Appeal Continues

Just admit it.

Panzer got up from his noon nap today to bright sunshine. My adventuresome kitty hopped into the Panzermobile. Unfortunately, when he got into the Catosphere he ran into a hail of crying and yowling. Following all the noise got him to the Publishers' Weekly site. There he found a post by Andrew Albanese about Apple's upcoming appeal of their loss in their price-fixing case.

Back on December 2 my kitty reporter told you about Apple's appeal. The appeal will be heard before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on December 15. In his post Mr. Albanese addresses the issues Apple's attorneys will argue to convince the court to overturn Judge Denise Cote's verdict in the original case. Then he addresses the Department of Justice's rebuttal to those issues.

Panzer says, "Just take the money you're giving your attorneys and pay it to the ebook buyers. It would save you a lot of money in the long run."

Warning: This is a v-e-r-y l-o-n-g post and you'll need more than one cup of tea to read the whole thing.

To read the post, tootle over to Apple E-book Appeal