The Internet Archive’s Recent Legal Setback
The internet archive has recently faced a significant legal challenge as the US Court of Appeals upheld a ruling from a lawsuit filed by major publishers. The court found that the internet archive’s practice of digitizing and lending books en masse violated copyright law. This lawsuit originated from the archive’s National Emergency Library initiative during the COVID-19 pandemic, which allowed unlimited access to digital books without waiting in lines, unlike traditional digital libraries.
Publishers’ Backlash Against Mass Lending
Four major publishers—Hachette, HarperCollins, Penguin Random House, and Wiley—filed the lawsuit, emphasizing the issue of copyright infringement due to the scanning and online lending of numerous works. While the internet archive claimed its activities fell under “fair use,” the court ultimately rejected this defense. This ruling strengthens publishers’ control over their materials and highlights the precarious balance between protecting copyright and facilitating access to information.
Implications for AI Technology and Copyright Law
This ruling carries substantial implications for the AI community. As lawsuits approach over AI companies mining texts for information, the definition of “fair use” is under scrutiny. Unlike the internet archive, which directly reproduces original works, AI tools generate information based on users’ needs, yet they still risk crossing the line into creating derivative works. If the courts narrow “fair use,” AI developers might face greater restrictions and costs for utilizing copyrighted materials, potentially stifling innovation and access to diverse data sources.
