Document Actions
Citation and metadata
Recommended citation
Raquel Xalabarder, Google Books and Fair Use: A Tale of Two Copyrights?, 5 (2014) JIPITEC 53 para 1.
Download Citation
Endnote
%0 Journal Article %T Google Books and Fair Use: A Tale of Two Copyrights? %A Xalabarder, Raquel %J JIPITEC %D 2014 %V 5 %N 1 %@ 2190-3387 %F xalabarder2014 %X On 14 November 2013, the US District Court of the Southern District of New York issued a major ruling in favour of the Google Books project, concluding that Google’s unauthorized scanning and indexing of millions of copyrighted books in the collections of participating libraries and subsequently making snippets of these works available online through the “Google Books” search tool qualifies as a fair use under section 107 USCA. After assuming that Google’s actions constitute a prima facie case of copyright infringement, Judge Chin examined the four factors in section 107 USCA and concluded in favour of fair use on the grounds that the project provides “significant public benefits,” that the unauthorized use of copyrighted works (a search tool of scanned full-text books) is “highly transformative” and that it does not supersede or supplant these works. The fair use defence also excluded Google’s liability for making copies of scanned books available to the libraries (as well as under secondary liability since library actions were also found to be protected by fair use): it is aimed at enhancing lawful uses of the digitized books by the libraries for the advancement of the arts and sciences. A previous ruling by the same court of 22 March 2011 had rejected a settlement agreement proposed by the parties, on the grounds that it was “not fair, adequate, and reasonable”. The Authors Guild has appealed the ruling. %L 340 %U http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-39081 %P 53-59Download
Bibtex
@Article{xalabarder2014,
author = "Xalabarder, Raquel",
title = "Google Books and Fair Use: A Tale of Two Copyrights?",
journal = "JIPITEC",
year = "2014",
volume = "5",
number = "1",
pages = "53--59",
abstract = "On 14 November 2013, the US District Court of the Southern District of New York issued a major ruling in favour of the Google Books project, concluding that Google's unauthorized scanning and indexing of millions of copyrighted books in the collections of participating libraries and subsequently making snippets of these works available online through the ``Google Books'' search tool qualifies as a fair use under section 107 USCA. After assuming that Google's actions constitute a prima facie case of copyright infringement, Judge Chin examined the four factors in section 107 USCA and concluded in favour of fair use on the grounds that the project provides ``significant public benefits,'' that the unauthorized use of copyrighted works (a search tool of scanned full-text books) is ``highly transformative'' and that it does not supersede or supplant these works. The fair use defence also excluded Google's liability for making copies of scanned books available to the libraries (as well as under secondary liability since library actions were also found to be protected by fair use): it is aimed at enhancing lawful uses of the digitized books by the libraries for the advancement of the arts and sciences. A previous ruling by the same court of 22 March 2011 had rejected a settlement agreement proposed by the parties, on the grounds that it was ``not fair, adequate, and reasonable''. The Authors Guild has appealed the ruling.",
issn = "2190-3387",
url = "http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-39081"
}
Download
RIS
TY - JOUR AU - Xalabarder, Raquel PY - 2014 DA - 2014// TI - Google Books and Fair Use: A Tale of Two Copyrights? JO - JIPITEC SP - 53 EP - 59 VL - 5 IS - 1 AB - On 14 November 2013, the US District Court of the Southern District of New York issued a major ruling in favour of the Google Books project, concluding that Google’s unauthorized scanning and indexing of millions of copyrighted books in the collections of participating libraries and subsequently making snippets of these works available online through the “Google Books” search tool qualifies as a fair use under section 107 USCA. After assuming that Google’s actions constitute a prima facie case of copyright infringement, Judge Chin examined the four factors in section 107 USCA and concluded in favour of fair use on the grounds that the project provides “significant public benefits,” that the unauthorized use of copyrighted works (a search tool of scanned full-text books) is “highly transformative” and that it does not supersede or supplant these works. The fair use defence also excluded Google’s liability for making copies of scanned books available to the libraries (as well as under secondary liability since library actions were also found to be protected by fair use): it is aimed at enhancing lawful uses of the digitized books by the libraries for the advancement of the arts and sciences. A previous ruling by the same court of 22 March 2011 had rejected a settlement agreement proposed by the parties, on the grounds that it was “not fair, adequate, and reasonable”. The Authors Guild has appealed the ruling. SN - 2190-3387 UR - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-39081 ID - xalabarder2014 ER -Download
Wordbib
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <b:Sources SelectedStyle="" xmlns:b="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" xmlns="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" > <b:Source> <b:Tag>xalabarder2014</b:Tag> <b:SourceType>ArticleInAPeriodical</b:SourceType> <b:Year>2014</b:Year> <b:PeriodicalTitle>JIPITEC</b:PeriodicalTitle> <b:Volume>5</b:Volume> <b:Issue>1</b:Issue> <b:Url>http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-39081</b:Url> <b:Pages>53-59</b:Pages> <b:Author> <b:Author><b:NameList> <b:Person><b:Last>Xalabarder</b:Last><b:First>Raquel</b:First></b:Person> </b:NameList></b:Author> </b:Author> <b:Title>Google Books and Fair Use: A Tale of Two Copyrights?</b:Title> <b:Comments>On 14 November 2013, the US District Court of the Southern District of New York issued a major ruling in favour of the Google Books project, concluding that Google’s unauthorized scanning and indexing of millions of copyrighted books in the collections of participating libraries and subsequently making snippets of these works available online through the “Google Books” search tool qualifies as a fair use under section 107 USCA. After assuming that Google’s actions constitute a prima facie case of copyright infringement, Judge Chin examined the four factors in section 107 USCA and concluded in favour of fair use on the grounds that the project provides “significant public benefits,” that the unauthorized use of copyrighted works (a search tool of scanned full-text books) is “highly transformative” and that it does not supersede or supplant these works. The fair use defence also excluded Google’s liability for making copies of scanned books available to the libraries (as well as under secondary liability since library actions were also found to be protected by fair use): it is aimed at enhancing lawful uses of the digitized books by the libraries for the advancement of the arts and sciences. A previous ruling by the same court of 22 March 2011 had rejected a settlement agreement proposed by the parties, on the grounds that it was “not fair, adequate, and reasonable”. The Authors Guild has appealed the ruling.</b:Comments> </b:Source> </b:Sources>Download
ISI
PT Journal AU Xalabarder, R TI Google Books and Fair Use: A Tale of Two Copyrights? SO JIPITEC PY 2014 BP 53 EP 59 VL 5 IS 1 AB On 14 November 2013, the US District Court of the Southern District of New York issued a major ruling in favour of the Google Books project, concluding that Google’s unauthorized scanning and indexing of millions of copyrighted books in the collections of participating libraries and subsequently making snippets of these works available online through the “Google Books” search tool qualifies as a fair use under section 107 USCA. After assuming that Google’s actions constitute a prima facie case of copyright infringement, Judge Chin examined the four factors in section 107 USCA and concluded in favour of fair use on the grounds that the project provides “significant public benefits,” that the unauthorized use of copyrighted works (a search tool of scanned full-text books) is “highly transformative” and that it does not supersede or supplant these works. The fair use defence also excluded Google’s liability for making copies of scanned books available to the libraries (as well as under secondary liability since library actions were also found to be protected by fair use): it is aimed at enhancing lawful uses of the digitized books by the libraries for the advancement of the arts and sciences. A previous ruling by the same court of 22 March 2011 had rejected a settlement agreement proposed by the parties, on the grounds that it was “not fair, adequate, and reasonable”. The Authors Guild has appealed the ruling. ERDownload
Mods
<mods>
<titleInfo>
<title>Google Books and Fair Use: A Tale of Two Copyrights?</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="family">Xalabarder</namePart>
<namePart type="given">Raquel</namePart>
</name>
<abstract>On 14 November 2013, the US District Court of the Southern District of New York issued a major ruling in favour of the Google Books project, concluding that Google’s unauthorized scanning and indexing of millions of copyrighted books in the collections of participating libraries and subsequently making snippets of these works available online through the “Google Books” search tool qualifies as a fair use under section 107 USCA. After assuming that Google’s actions constitute a prima facie case of copyright infringement, Judge Chin examined the four factors in section 107 USCA and concluded in favour of fair use on the grounds that the project provides “significant public benefits,” that the unauthorized use of copyrighted works (a search tool of scanned full-text books) is “highly transformative” and that it does not supersede or supplant these works. The fair use defence also excluded Google’s liability for making copies of scanned books available to the libraries (as well as under secondary liability since library actions were also found to be protected by fair use): it is aimed at enhancing lawful uses of the digitized books by the libraries for the advancement of the arts and sciences. A previous ruling by the same court of 22 March 2011 had rejected a settlement agreement proposed by the parties, on the grounds that it was “not fair, adequate, and reasonable”. The Authors Guild has appealed the ruling.</abstract>
<subject />
<classification authority="ddc">340</classification>
<relatedItem type="host">
<genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
<genre>academic journal</genre>
<titleInfo>
<title>JIPITEC</title>
</titleInfo>
<part>
<detail type="volume">
<number>5</number>
</detail>
<detail type="issue">
<number>1</number>
</detail>
<date>2014</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>53</start>
<end>59</end>
</extent>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<identifier type="issn">2190-3387</identifier>
<identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:0009-29-39081</identifier>
<identifier type="uri">http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-39081</identifier>
<identifier type="citekey">xalabarder2014</identifier>
</mods>
Download
Full Metadata
| Bibliographic Citation | Journal of intellectual property, information technology and electronic commerce law 5 (2014) 1 |
|---|---|
| Title |
Google Books and Fair Use: A Tale of Two Copyrights? (eng) |
| Author | Raquel Xalabarder |
| Language | eng |
| Abstract | On 14 November 2013, the US District Court of the Southern District of New York issued a major ruling in favour of the Google Books project, concluding that Google’s unauthorized scanning and indexing of millions of copyrighted books in the collections of participating libraries and subsequently making snippets of these works available online through the “Google Books” search tool qualifies as a fair use under section 107 USCA. After assuming that Google’s actions constitute a prima facie case of copyright infringement, Judge Chin examined the four factors in section 107 USCA and concluded in favour of fair use on the grounds that the project provides “significant public benefits,” that the unauthorized use of copyrighted works (a search tool of scanned full-text books) is “highly transformative” and that it does not supersede or supplant these works. The fair use defence also excluded Google’s liability for making copies of scanned books available to the libraries (as well as under secondary liability since library actions were also found to be protected by fair use): it is aimed at enhancing lawful uses of the digitized books by the libraries for the advancement of the arts and sciences. A previous ruling by the same court of 22 March 2011 had rejected a settlement agreement proposed by the parties, on the grounds that it was “not fair, adequate, and reasonable”. The Authors Guild has appealed the ruling. |
| Subject | |
| DDC | 340 |
| Rights | DPPL |
| URN: | urn:nbn:de:0009-29-39081 |
