WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court turned away a challenge Monday to Google’s online book library from authors who complained that the project makes it harder for them to market their work.
The justices let stand lower court rulings in favor of Google and rejected the authors’ claim that the company’s digitizing of millions of books amounts to “copyright infringement on an epic scale.”
Lower courts have said that Google can provide small portions of the books to the public without violating copyright laws.
The Authors Guild and individual authors first filed their challenge to Google’s digital book project in 2005. Google Inc. has made digital copies of more than 20 million books from major research libraries and established a publicly available search function.
In October, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York agreed with a judge who concluded that Google was not violating copyright laws when it showed customers small portions of the books.
The three-judge appeals panel did acknowledge, though, that some book sales would likely be lost if someone were merely searching for a portion of text to ascertain a fact.
- Posted April 20, 2016
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Challenge to Google's online library rejected
headlines Macomb
- Fall family fun
- MDHHS announces enhancements to improve substance use disorder treatment access
- Levin Center looks at congressional investigation of torture and mistreatment of war detainees
- State Unemployment Insurance Agency provides tips on how to stop criminals from stealing benefits
- Supreme Court leaves in place Alaska campaign disclosure rules voters approved in 2020
headlines National
- Professional success is not achieved through participation trophies
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- ‘Jailbreak: Love on the Run’ misses chance to examine staff sexual misconduct at detention centers
- Utah considers allowing law grads to choose apprenticeship rather than bar exam
- Can lawyers hold doctors accountable for wasting our time?
- Lawyer suspended after arguing cocaine enhanced his cognition