Regardless of the legal merits of the Internet Archive's case, and regardless of Hachette Book Group's insistence otherwise, it's clear from Hachette's argument

Regardless of the legal merits of the Internet Archive's case, and regardless of Hachette Book Group's insistence otherwise, it's clear from Hachette's arguments and public statements that they would be happiest if public libraries altogether didn't exist and fair use was erased from law. And regardless of what the law is, the Internet Archive an other libraries should be allowed to lend out a digitized copy of a physical book they own while the physical book is not in use (i.e. controlled digital lending). This is especially true for books without an official digital edition. Hachette doesn't want this, because they want to extract as much revenue from libraries as possible through continuing subscription fees for digital catalogs. Finally, while I agree that the Internet Archive's arguments that the National Emergency Library's unlimited lending should be fair use were always tenuous, I'm still saddened that the arguments failed, and think the precedent their failure sets is much worse for society than the precedent from their success would have been.