The Internet Archive said it will appeal the ruling. The Authors Guild, a professional organization for published writers, praised the ruling, saying that 'scanning & lending books w/out permission or compensation is NOT fair use-it is theft & it devalues authors' works.' The Association of American Publishers said the ruling reaffirmed the importance of copyright law. Koeltl noted that the Internet Archive can still scan and publish copies of books that are in the public domain.

Every authority points the other direction.' 'But no case or legal principle supports that notion. 'At bottom, IA's fair use defense rests on the notion that lawfully acquiring a copyrighted print book entitles the recipient to make an unauthorized copy and distribute it in place of the print book, so long as it does not simultaneously lend the print book,' Koeltl said in his opinion. Koeltl of the Southern District of New York sided with the publishers, saying established law was on their side. The Internet Archive, which strives to provide 'universal access to all knowledge,' said its online library is legal under the doctrine of fair use.īut on Friday, U.S. Though libraries typically license e-books from publishers, the Internet Archive said it practiced 'controlled digital lending,' which argues that entities that own physical copies of books can lend out scanned versions. The four publishing houses - Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins, John Wiley & Sons and Penguin Random House - accused the Internet Archive of 'mass copyright infringement' for loaning out digital copies of books without compensation or permission from the publishers. A federal judge has ruled in favor of a group of book publishers who sued the nonprofit Internet Archive in the early days of the coronavirus pandemic for scanning and lending digital copies of copyrighted books.

Flipboard online