> OpenLibrary's "emergency library" made IA legally vulnerable According to the plaintiffs and the judge who agreed with them, controlled digital lending was a

> OpenLibrary's "emergency library" made IA legally vulnerable According to the plaintiffs and the judge who agreed with them, controlled digital lending was always illegal and they always had grounds to sue. So it did not make them "legally vulnerable." I could see it argued that it made them "rhetorically vulnerable" and that's why the publishers took this particular moment to sue, but your statement is in contradiction with the plaintiffs and judge.