OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc. v. Anna's Archive
2:24-cv-00144
| S.D. Ohio | Mar 21, 2025Background
- OCLC, Inc., a non-profit maintaining the WorldCat global library database, alleges Anna's Archive and associated individuals scraped WorldCat's data.
- OCLC claims Defendants breached WorldCat.org's browserwrap Terms and Conditions, unjustly enriched themselves, interfered with contracts, and violated criminal and property laws.
- Anna's Archive did not respond to the lawsuit, leading OCLC to seek default judgment.
- The district court found that OCLC's claims involve "novel and unsettled" questions under Ohio law, especially around data scraping’s legal status.
- The court denied OCLC’s motion for default judgment without prejudice and decided to certify key state law questions to the Ohio Supreme Court.
- The court gave OCLC leave to amend its complaint to cure any deficiencies.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enforceability of browserwrap contract | Defendants bound by WorldCat Terms by using the site | Not presented (default) | Unsettled under Ohio law; court will certify |
| Unjust enrichment from data scraping | Retention and use of scraped data is unjust | Not presented (default) | Unsettled; court will certify |
| Tortious interference with contracts/prospects | Scraping made fulfillment/cancellation of OCLC contracts harder | Not presented (default) | Not adequately pleaded; court invites amendment & certifies |
| Civil claims based on Ohio cybercrime statute | Scraping violated Ohio computer crime law, allowing damages | Not presented (default) | Unsettled statutory issue; court will certify |
| Trespass to chattels and conversion by scraping | Scraping impaired/converted OCLC chattels (data/servers) | Not presented (default) | Insufficient factual pleading; legal question unsettled; certify |
| Copyright preemption of state law claims | State law claims serve interests outside copyright law scope | Not presented (default) | Nexus to state/federal law unsettled; will certify |
Key Cases Cited
- Nguyen v. Barnes & Noble Inc., 763 F.3d 1171 (9th Cir. 2014) (Browserwrap vs. clickwrap enforceability standards)
- Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc., 489 U.S. 141 (Federal preemption of state intellectual property claims)
- Fred Siegel Co., L.P.A. v. Arter & Hadden, 707 N.E.2d 853 (Ohio's standard for tortious interference claims)
- Lamson & Sessions Co. v. Peters, 576 F. App’x 538 (6th Cir. 2014) (Requirement of actual contract breach for interference claim)
- Dana Ltd. v. Aon Consulting, Inc., 984 F. Supp. 2d 755 (N.D. Ohio 2013) (Conversion under Ohio law requires exclusion from property)
- Lehman Bros. v. Schein, 416 U.S. 386 (Federal courts may certify state law issues to state supreme courts)