> Google making the project non-profit would not have saved them from the lawsuit. The Author's Guild, separately, sued a non-profit partner in the Google Books

> Google making the project non-profit would not have saved them from the lawsuit. The Author's Guild, separately, sued a non-profit partner in the Google Books scanning project -- HathiTrust. > That lawsuit was not resolved until 2012 -- when, without a settlement, HathiTrust won on fair use. I think you're mixed up on some things. HathiTrust wasn't sued until after the settlement was rejected, meaning Google was getting sued simultaneously. It is good the original settlement was rejected, though I agree with the author that a modification to the settlement, similar to what the Internet Archive was asking for, was a much better solution than another decade of court battles and no orphan works for another century. > The OP should ask, why didn't Google go to trial? Google did go and the district court ruled that scanning, searching and snippets were fair use in 2013[1]. The case is still ongoing, the Second Circuit heard arguments last December[2] [1] https://www.publicknowledge.org/files/google%20summary%20judgment%20final.pdf https://www.publicknowledge.org/files/google%20summary%20jud... [2] https://www.eff.org/cases/authors-guild-v-google-part-ii-fair-use-proceedings https://www.eff.org/cases/authors-guild-v-google-part-ii-fai...