Library Futures | A Response to Hachette v. Internet Archive from Michelle

valuable insight into the argument against hatchet and other publishers on the basis of lack of market harm and the intention of copyright as it pertains to digital vs physical goods.

and yet, my confidence is low, given the recent precedent to favor consolidation of power by incumbent publishers.

using legal arguments and the law to favor librarians and organizations like the Internet archive feel like a last stand that isn't going very well.

perhaps, the path towards their goals is not won through courts but by artists, authors and musicians opting out of corporate entities and paving a path towards a vision of less power and influence (and likely concentrated earnings) and more openness, sharing and distribution.

Michelle Wu, retired law library director and professor at Georgetown Law, responds to the oral arguments in the Hachette v. Internet Archive appeal. She discusses three lines of questioning and two repeated claims, arguing that the court should recognize that copyright is purposeful and that fair use is contextual. She also argues that CDL serves authors and the public by providing financial support for authors and publishers and stable public access to works by current and future readers.