Posted from Diigo.
Category: Intellectual Property
“Google’s copying is fair use under 17 U.S.C. §107 and is therefore not infringing.
The Court of Appeals concludes that the defendant’s copying is transformative within the meaning of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 10 578-585 (1994), does not offer the public a meaningful substitute for matter protected by the plaintiffs’ copyrights, and satisfies § 107’s test for fair use.”
Court of Appeal ruling here.
Confirming the District Court decision that you can find here.
-
European Publishers Play Lobbying Role Against Google – The New York Times
“The argument is simple enough: Publishers want money from Google,” said Till Kreutzer, a German lawyer who has campaigned against these new copyright proposals. “Many European politicians are open to listening to that type of proposal.”
Posted from Diigo.
-
Causa C-117/13
Technische Universität Darmstadt.pdf“Uno Stato membro può autorizzare le biblioteche a digitalizzare, senza il consenso dei titolari dei diritti, determinati libri della loro collezione al fine di proporli su posti di lettura elettronica.
-
Gli Stati membri possono, entro certi limiti e a determinate condizioni qual i il pagamento di un equo compenso ai titolari dei diritti, autorizzare gli utilizzatori a stampare su carta o a memorizzare su una chiave USB i libri digitalizzati dalla biblioteca”
- Posted from Diigo.
-
Julia Reda – Reda Report adopted: A turning point in the copyright debate
“Today, the Legal Affairs Committee of the European Parliament passed an amended version of my copyright evaluation report with a broad majority. “
Posted from Diigo.
