Authors Guild, Inc. v. Hathitrust
902 F. Supp. 2d 445
S.D.N.Y.2012Background
- MDP digitizes library works via Google; HDL contains ~10 million volumes, ~73% copyrighted.
- Plaintiffs allege unauthorized reproduction/distribution of universities’ books; seek declaratory and injunctive relief, and impoundment.
- Four universities participate in MD P; print-disabled access via HDL is transformative and ADA-compliant.
- OWP involves orphan works identification and potential future access; program suspended by UM with no new process.
- Associational Plaintiffs (Authors Guild and foreign associates) seek to represent members’ copyrights; many motions concern standing and ripeness.
- Court grants some defendants’ judgments on pleadings and summary judgments; fair-use defense upheld for MD P/HDL; OWP not ripe; U.S. associational standing lacking statutory standing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Associational Plaintiffs have statutory standing. | Associational Plaintiffs have Article III standing to sue for their members’ rights. | Copyright Act restricts enforcement to owners/beneficiaries; associations lack statutory standing. | U.S. Associational Plaintiffs lack statutory standing under the Copyright Act. |
| Whether OWP claims are ripe for review. | OWP will infringe; claims seek declaration/injunction against a future program. | Ripeness uncertain; future program speculates on features and impact. | OWP claims are not ripe; granted as to pleadings. |
| Whether fair-use applies to the MDP/HDL activities and other defenses are available. | Fair use and other defenses do not apply to MD P/HDL copying. | Fair use applies; Section 108 is supplementary and not exclusive; other defenses may apply. | Fair use available; MD P/HDL copies protected as fair use; other defenses denied as to pleadings. |
| Whether ADA and Chafee Amendment support access to print-disabled users for HDL. | No basis beyond fair use for accessibility copies. | ADA/Chafee support access; authorized entities may reproduce for blind users. | UM qualifies as authorized entity; HDL access for print-disabled is permissible under ADA/Chafee. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission, 432 U.S. 333 (1977) (standing of associations if certain conditions met)
- Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994) (overall fair-use evaluation; transformative use emphasized)
- Sony Corp. of Am. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984) (nonexclusive fair-use factors; noncommercial/public-interest considerations)
- NXIVM Corp. v. Ross Inst., 364 F.3d 471 (2d Cir. 2004) (weighing fair-use factors; transformative use favored when benefits to public)
- Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc., 153 F.3d 82 (2d Cir. 1998) (foreign-law standing considerations; national treatment)
- Arriba Soft Corp. v. Google, Inc., 336 F.3d 821 (9th Cir. 2003) (transformative thumbnail/search use; fair-use analysis)
- Perfect 10 v. Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2007) (transformative use and search/display context as fair use)
- Texaco, Inc. v. Amer. Geophysical Union, 60 F.3d 913 (2d Cir. 1994) (contextual fair-use/archival copying; noncommercial considerations)