Copyright: Publishers, Internet Archive File Court Proposal - Publishing Perspectives

Today's trip into the Catosphere took Panzer to the Publishing Perspectives site. There with a little digging in the posts he found one about the Internet Archive (IA) copyright infringement lawsuit. Panzer told you when IA lost the case to the publishers suing for copyright infringement.

 

According to the post by Porter Anderson, the publishers involved in the lawsuit and the Internet Archive (IA) presented a proposal for their agreed upon settlement to the court last week.

 

You lost. Say sorry. And pay.

Panzer says, "In simple terms: IA will stop stealing. IA will pay a secret amount of money, if it loses its court appeal."

 

Note: This is a very long post. Bring a pitcher of lemonade and three chocolate chip cookies (biscuits) for today's reading selections.

 

To read the post tootle over to Internet Archive

DOJ v. PRH: Challenges over Bid Competition, Market Share - Publishers Weekly

Today, Panzer made another trip to the Publishers Weekly site to get the latest news for you about the Department of Justice's (DOJ) case against Penguin Random House's (PRH) acquisition of Simon and Schuster (S&S).

Back and forth. Makes me dizzy.

According to Ed Nawotka's post, PRH's witness Edward Snyder again took the stand to be cross-examined by the DOJ about his statements concerning book auctions and book advance bidding. Following his testimony, the DOJ brought in Nicholas Hill to rebut Snyder's testimony about the bidding and show why it was unsupported. Included in the post are links to previous posts.

 

Panzer says, "Depending on how you arrange them, statistics will say whatever you want."

Note: This is a long post. Bring a large glass of iced tea and a big muffin for today's reading selection. If you plan to follow the links in the post, you'll need to decide what to bring to eat and drink.

To read the post tootle over to Bid Competition

DOJ V PRH: Jonathan Karp and Stephen King Take the Stand - Publishers Weekly

Today Panzer stopped in at the Publishers Weekly site to get an update on the Department of Justice lawsuit (DOJ) to stop the merger of Penguin Random House (PRH) and Simon and Schuster (S&S).

 

According to the post by Andrew Albanese, the case is a back and forth of witnesses against the merger and witnesses for the merger. Bestselling author Stephen King testified why the merger would be bad for authors if there's one less publisher to sell to. S&S CEO Jonathan Karp testified why the merger should be allowed to proceed. Agent Ayesha Pande, Kensington CEO Steve Zachanus and S&S CFO Dennis Eulau also testified.

I have my own opinion.

Panzer says, "Hmm ... Interesting ... Stephen King ... Only witness the publishers' attorney didn't cross examine. This little kitty will let you figure out why he didn't."

 

Note: This is a huge post. Bring a thermos of iced tea, two muffins, a brownie, and a chocolate chip cookie (biscuit) for today's reading selection.

 

To read the post tootle over to Jonathan Karp and Stephen King

Discovery Extension Requested in Internet Archive Book Scanning Suit - Publishers Weekly

Today as Panzer was tootling around in the Catosphere the Panzermobile was violently shaken by booing and hissing coming from outside. Following all the chaos took our brave kitty boy to the Publishers Weekly site. There he found a post about the Internet Archive was causing all the noise.  For the past year Panzer has been telling you about the publishers who have sued the Internet Archive for copyright infringement.

 

According to the post by Andrew Albanese, last year the four publishers Hachette, Penguin Random House, HarperCollins and Wiley filed a copyright infringement suit against the Internet Archive. The publishers' attorneys have now asked for an extension in the case. The case is set to be heard in court on September 24, but the attorneys have asked to have an extension until December 17. This is based in part on the Internet Archive's (IA) attorneys demand for ten years of monthly book sales reports for all the books published by all four of the publishers involved. The publishers' petition to have IA's discovery motion not granted is filed in another court and no decision has been made on the motion yet. IA isn't contesting the extension as there are several witnesses both sides of the case wish to question before the case is heard in court. The post contains links to other information about the copyright infringement case.

 

It's information on 500,000 books.

Panzer says, "This little kitty wants to know where the Internet Archive is getting all the money to pay for the attorneys."

 

Note: This is a long-medium length post. Bring a cup of tea and a muffins for today's reading selection.

 

To read the post tootle over to Internet Archive

To read Panzer's previous post tootle over to IA discovery motion 

Oral Arguments Set in B&N's Bid to Knock Out Former CEO's Defamation Claim - Publishers Weekly

As Panzer was tootling around in the Catosphere, he was greeted by groaning and sighing coming from outside the Panzermobile. Following all the noise, took our brave kitty pilot to the Publishers Weekly site. There he found a post about the Demos Parneros lawsuit against Barnes and Noble. This lawsuit (and counter-suit) have been dragging on for two years.

It's been going on for years.

According to the post by Andrew Albanese, Barnes and Noble's arguments to get portions of  Parneros' lawsuit dismissed will be heard in court in August. Barnes and Noble ex-CEO Parneros filed the lawsuit in 2018 after he was fired. In his lawsuit he says he is unemployable because the press release announcing his termination ruined his reputation and led others to believe he was fired for sexual harassment. Barnes and Noble counters that all the press release said was that he was terminated for "violating company policy." Due to the direct wording of the press release the company is asking the court to dismiss the defamation portion of the lawsuit. There are links included in the post to previous posts about the lawsuit and to copies of the court filings.

Panzer says, "When this little kitty read the press release sexual harassment didn't even enter his mind until Demos Parneros filed the lawsuit and said he wasn't fired for sexual harassment."

Note: This is a medium length post. Bring a cup of tea for today's reading selection. If you plan to follow all the links, bring two thermoses of tea and twelve muffins and twelve cookies (biscuits) because those court papers are really long.

To read the post tootle over to Barnes and Noble Ex-CEO Parneros lawsuit

F+W Media To Present Winning Community Bids to Bankruptcy Court - Publishing Perspectives

Panzer decided to make a stop at the Publishing Perspectives site today. With just a little digging in the posts our inquisitive kitty boy found one about F+W's bankruptcy. Panzer told you about the bankruptcy news a few days ago.

According to Publishing Perspectives Editor-in-Chief Porter Anderson, F+W Media has presented the winning bids to the court for each of the company's online communities in its bankruptcy filing. One of the ten online communities is the Writing Community. The post includes a list of the winning and second highest bidders for each community. Also included is information about the winning bidders.

Does it include names and email addresses?

Panzer says, "Hmm ... This little kitty wants to know what the winning bidders are going to do with the community information."

Note: This is a medium-long post. Bring a cup of tea and two muffins for today's reading selection.

To read the post tootle over to F+W Media bankruptcy

To read Panzer's previous post about F+W Media tootle over to Penguin Random House

Apple E-book Refunds to begin June 21 - PW

Panzer barely got to sleep for his after dinner nap when he got shaken out of his kitty bed by shouting and cheering coming from the Catosphere. Our sleepy little kitty pilot headed the Panzermobile out. Following all the noise took him to the Publishers' Weekly site. Panzer found the source of all the excitement was a post about Apple.

Okay. Back to sleep now.

According to the post by Andrew Albanese, Apple began giving out the ebook refunds from the court case they lost. Apple lost the price-fixing case and their appeal and were ordered to give refunds to purchasers of ebooks. The Apple refunds will be sent directly to buyers' accounts no matter where they purchased the ebooks.The credits will be paid to your account if you bought an ebook between April 1, 2010 and May 21, 2012.

Panzer says, "It's about time. That case went on for years."

Note: This is a shortish post. A cup of tea should be enough for today's reading selection.

To read the post, tootle over to Apple refunds

More Ellora's Cave vs Dear Author

It has been such a long day.

Panzer got a late start on today's trip into the Catosphere. But my poor little overworked kitty boy did manage to make it over to The Passive Voice site. He found an interesting post about the ongoing court fight between erotica publisher Ellora's Cave and the Dear Author blog site.

My busy kitty reporter told you about the court case in his October 3rd post. In the earlier post he explained to you that Amazon was being blamed for Ellora's Cave's financial problems.  Now, there's information on new developments in the case. The developments involve moving the case from state court to Federal Court, difficulty getting depositions and other case matters. You'll want to read the Comments section for even more information and other links.

Panzer says, "I couldn't find a mention of Amazon anywhere."

To read the full post, tootle over to Elloras Cave vs Dear Author

Apple Settlement May Not Be Settled Says Judge

I thought the end was in sight.

Panzer just got a Reuters news flash about the proposed Apple ebook price-fixing case settlement and possible case reversal he told you about. The judge in the case has not accepted the settlement.

U.S. District Judge Denise Cote says she has serious reservations about the settlement. Judge Cote sites issues with the amount and terms of the settlement as well as other issues,

Panzer says, "Just when I thought it might end ... no such luck for this kitty."

To read the entire Reuters news story, tootle over to Apple Ebooks Settlement

Apple Asks Court For Reversal

Finally! Maybe I can get a nap now.

Yaay! Panzer can hardly believe his luck. He was digging around at Publisher's Weekly today and found something besides the Amazon-Hachette dispute in the news there.

According to a post by Andrew Albanese, Apple has asked the Second Circuit Court to reverse the decision of Apple's price-fixing conviction by Judge Cote. Apple argues that the Department of Justice (DoJ) got their information all wrong and Judge Cote made the wrong decision.

Panzer says, "Hmmm. So everybody is wrong except Apple. Interesting defense."

If you want to read Apple's argument to the court, tootle over to Apple pleads for reversal

Apple Loses in Court

Panzer is back from the Catosphere with big news about the Apple price-fixing case.

But first, he wants us to give you a little test.

You're kidding right?

Okay?

 Everybody who thought Apple would win the price-fixing case hold up a paw.

Let's see.

That's one. Mr. Tim Cook. Really?

Panzer says, if you want to read about the ruling, tootle on over to Publishers Weekly.

Apple Case Gets Interesting

Attorneys?

Panzer has been reading the information online about the Apple Court Case. He doesn't care about the ebook pricing issues involved. He calls it research in case he ever includes a court scene in one of his stories.

Panzer says, "Whatever you might think about the Apple case, it is fun to follow all of the ins and outs of the attorneys in the case."

So, if you're interested in the latest news from the case, go to Apple Court Case and then let us know what you think.

Amazon Fights to Keep Secrets

Interested Party?

Panzer was over at Publishers' Weekly this morning snooping around.

My bad boy found some interesting news about the Apple price-fixing trial. It seems Amazon wants to redact or seal parts of the evidence concerning the Kindle ebook program. Of course,  Apple wants the evidence un-redacted so they (and everybody else) can learn the secrets to Amazon's success.

My bad boy says, "Come on Apple. Amazon isn't even part of the case. What is this interested party stuff?  Anybody that bought a book through Apple is an interested party in the price-fixing case. You want my business information, too?"

If you're interested in the price-fixing case and how corporations fight it out in court, tootle on over to Amazon Fights to Keep Secrets in Ebook Trial