4 ms·
> They're not in court for the emergency library. They are in court for the "emergency library". The emergency library is a key part of the case. It's just ine
by Mindwipe 4y ago
> They're not in court for the emergency library.
They are in court for the "emergency library". The emergency library is a key part of the case. It's just inevitable that the lawsuit would also hinge on if 1 - 1 CDL is legally permissible and the case will inevitably have to rule on that.
And yes, timing wise, and from the letters the publishes sent to the IA, they are explicitly about the "emergency library".
- thebooktocome 4y agoI read the opinion. The emergency library appears once, only insofar as CDL being found not fair use entails that emergency lending was also not fair use. It’s an entirely severable part of the decision. The publishers legally had a case against CDL without it.
- jrmg 4y agoThe emergency library is definitely not what the case is about. You can read the decision and it’s hardly mentioned. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.537900/gov.uscourts.nysd.537900.188.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.53... It might be the case that it prompted publishers to file earlier, but I have a very hard time believing they’d have just let 1:1 digital-for-physical lending slide for ever if it hadn’t happened.