[HN Gopher] Internet Archive Responds to Appellate Opinion in Ha...
___________________________________________________________________
Internet Archive Responds to Appellate Opinion in Hachette vs.
Internet Archive
Author : rbanffy
Score : 14 points
Date : 2024-09-13 17:47 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.archive.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.archive.org)
| mouse_ wrote:
| If we didn't already have libraries, we would never allow them.
| fngjdflmdflg wrote:
| Libraries are specifically protected by US copyright law,
| according to one of the judges in the oral argument in this
| case:[0]
|
| >Well you know there's a statutory carve-out for libraries,
| right? Congress made clear that there's an authorization for
| libraries to lend out the books. Is it totally obvious that if
| Congress didn't provide that carve-out that what libraries were
| doing, even if they scaled up, would fall under fair use?
|
| I'm not sure what statute this is but it seems to be U.S. Code
| 17 SS 109[1] based on later discussion in that oral argument:
|
| >Can I ask a more basic question? So if Congress had not
| codified the first sale doctrine and didn't have Section 109
| that authorizes libraries, and libraries only had to rely on
| the fair use doctrine Would it be obvious that you could do
| whatever you want with the physical book?
|
| It's not clear if this applies only to libraries or if the
| judge means anything that is like what a library does (ie.
| lending). The IA lawyer says "Section 109 says anyone, a
| library or not, can lend out a physical object physically." I
| think the issue is with converting the format from print to
| digital, which is only allowed for specific cases, as outlined
| in section 108, based on the discussion in the oral argument.
|
| [0] https://archive.org/details/20240628-appeal-oral-argument-
| se... at 11:26 and later 40:21
|
| [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/109
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-13 23:02 UTC)