3 ms·

Is that true? I don’t remember Google Books destroying scanned books and they scanned a ton of books.

by beering 2mo ago

deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
beering 2mo ago
Follow up: I can’t seem to find any ruling that says you need to destroy the scanned book. Destroying the book might bolster your case in a copyright lawsuit, but the law does not require it afaict. I doubt you would lose a lawsuit simply because you put the book in a locked warehouse after scanning it.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
vitorfblima 2mo ago
IANAL, but I think you are allowed to copy work for non-commercial use.
- pfdietz 2mo ago
  I don't think so. I believe teachers (for example) have gotten in trouble over this.
- pbhjpbhj 2mo ago
  It's very dependent on jurisdiction (and if you're rich, or a big company). In UK there's no non-commercial use exception at all. In USA it can fall under Fair Use, commercial nature is not the sole measure though.
  - vitorfblima 2mo ago
    In my jurisdiction (Brazil) there is non-commercial use, but most people don't know about it.
    - bighi 2mo ago
      You are mixing the concepts of fair use and non-commercial use. Non-commercial use is not allowed in Brazil. But Brazil does have some fair use exceptions (like most countries that signed the international agreement on intellectual property). In Brazil it's illegal for me to make copies of a book and distribute it for free on the streets, for example. It's 100% non-commercial, but still illegal.
- jerf 2mo ago
  The term you want to Google on is "fair use", and be prepared for a nightmare of complexity and fuzzy borders if you want to really learn about it. "Non-commercial" use can relate to one particular aspect of fair use, but there definitely is no blanket "you can copy work for non-commercial use" proviso in copyright law. It fell off the front page but here's a relevant story from today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49123300 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49123300
pbhjpbhj 2mo ago
They broke copyright law. Too big to care, it something. Some legislation got pushed through in some jurisdictions to allow them to claim things were "orphaned works".
dilyevsky 2mo ago
yes it's true, us court has ruled destructive scanning is required to make it "fair use" (ianal, etc etc) - https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2025/06/from-books-to-bots-key-takeaways-from-the-anthropic-fair-use-decision-for-ai-developers https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2025/06/from-bo...
- bighi 2mo ago
  Are these books being destroyed in the US?
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]

Is that true? I don’t remember Google Books destroying scanned books and they scanned a ton of books.

by beering 2mo ago

Is that true? I don’t remember Google Books destroying scanned books and they scanned a ton of books.

deleted 2mo ago

[deleted]

beering 2mo ago

Follow up: I can’t seem to find any ruling that says you need to destroy the scanned book. Destroying the book might bolster your case in a copyright lawsuit, but the law does not require it afaict. I doubt you would lose a lawsuit simply because you put the book in a locked warehouse after scanning it.

deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]

vitorfblima 2mo ago

IANAL, but I think you are allowed to copy work for non-commercial use.

pfdietz 2mo ago
I don't think so. I believe teachers (for example) have gotten in trouble over this.
pbhjpbhj 2mo ago
It's very dependent on jurisdiction (and if you're rich, or a big company). In UK there's no non-commercial use exception at all. In USA it can fall under Fair Use, commercial nature is not the sole measure though.
- vitorfblima 2mo ago
  In my jurisdiction (Brazil) there is non-commercial use, but most people don't know about it.
  - bighi 2mo ago
    You are mixing the concepts of fair use and non-commercial use. Non-commercial use is not allowed in Brazil. But Brazil does have some fair use exceptions (like most countries that signed the international agreement on intellectual property). In Brazil it's illegal for me to make copies of a book and distribute it for free on the streets, for example. It's 100% non-commercial, but still illegal.
jerf 2mo ago
The term you want to Google on is "fair use", and be prepared for a nightmare of complexity and fuzzy borders if you want to really learn about it. "Non-commercial" use can relate to one particular aspect of fair use, but there definitely is no blanket "you can copy work for non-commercial use" proviso in copyright law. It fell off the front page but here's a relevant story from today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49123300 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49123300

pbhjpbhj 2mo ago

They broke copyright law. Too big to care, it something. Some legislation got pushed through in some jurisdictions to allow them to claim things were "orphaned works".

dilyevsky 2mo ago

yes it's true, us court has ruled destructive scanning is required to make it "fair use" (ianal, etc etc) - https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2025/06/from-books-to-bots-key-takeaways-from-the-anthropic-fair-use-decision-for-ai-developers https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2025/06/from-bo...

bighi 2mo ago
Are these books being destroyed in the US?

deleted 2mo ago

[deleted]