On September 12, the Authors Guild, the Australian Society of Authors, the Union Des Écrivaines et des Écrivains Québécois (UNEQ), and eight individual authors filed a law suit against HathiTrust, the University of Michigan, the University of California, the University of Wisconsin, Indiana University, and Cornell University for copyright infringement. The links below provide details on the lawsuit, with opinions and analysis from different sources. Further information follows, describing what HathiTrust is doing and not doing with respect to digital preservation and access.
For the lawsuit in the news, please see links at http://www.hathitrust.org/around_the_web [48].
What HathiTrust is doing (General)
What we are not doing (General)
What we are doing with Orphan Works
What we are not doing with Orphan Works
We do not plan to change our access and preservation procedures in light of the lawsuit. We have a defined policy and process [51] by which parties may contend the use of certain works, which will remain in play.
Links:
[1] http://www.authorsguild.org/advocacy/articles/authors-3.html
[2] http://blog.authorsguild.org/2011/10/06/authors-groups-from-u-k-canada-norway-and-sweden-join-authors-guild-australian-society-of-authors-and-quebec-writers-union-in-suit-against-hathitrust/
[3] http://dockets.justia.com/docket/new-york/nysdce/1:2011cv06351/384619/
[4] http://thepublicindex.org/docs/cases/hathitrust/answer.pdf
[5] http://thepublicindex.org/documents/cases/hathitrust
[6] http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2011cv06351/384619/156/
[7] http://www.hathitrust.org/authors_guild_lawsuit_ruling
[8] http://www.hathitrust.org/authors_guild_lawsuit_statement
[9] http://networkedblogs.com/n5z0r
[10] http://www.lib.umich.edu/news/u-m-library-statement-orphan-works-project
[11] http://www.ur.umich.edu/update/archives/110916/courant
[12] http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/pa/key/AuthorsGuildLawsuit.html
[13] http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/resource_orphanworks_13sept11.pdf
[14] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qp1qpw8Lus
[15] http://laboratorium.net/archive/2011/09/12/the_orphan_wars
[16] http://laboratorium.net/archive/2011/09/26/the_procedural_swamp
[17] http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2011/09/13/stop-the-internet-we-want-to-get-off/
[18] http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2011/09/15/is-it-all-about-the-orphans/
[19] http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2011/09/16/an-open-letter-to-j-r-salamanca/
[20] http://copyright.columbia.edu/copyright/2011/09/13/authors-copyright-and-hathitrust/
[21] http://copyright.columbia.edu/copyright/2011/10/03/hathitrust-and-the-litigation-path/
[22] http://chrisbourg.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/round-up-on-authors-guild-v-hathitrust/
[23] http://chrisbourg.wordpress.com/2011/09/16/round-up-part-2-authors-guild-v-hathitrust/
[24] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/09/no-authors-have-been-harmed-making-library
[25] http://policynotes.arl.org/post/10402813009/about-those-orphans
[26] http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/law_policy_and_it/hathitrust_conundrum
[27] http://www.libraryjournal.com/lj/home/891900-264/are_you_kidding__editorial.html.csp
[28] http://nysbar.com/blogs/EASL/2011/09/the_google_books_project_now_t.html
[29] http://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/authors-guild-should-trust-universities-and-h
[30] http://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2011/authorsguild/
[31] http://reading20.posterous.com/national-federation-of-the-blind-has-filed-to
[32] http://laboratorium.net/archive/2012/03/04/gbs_authors_guild_goes_for_an_early_knockout
[33] http://policynotes.arl.org/post/18800477459/finally-an-easy-ish-question
[34] http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2012/03/05/a-masterpiece-of-misdirection/
[35] http://policynotes.arl.org/post/21695785549/library-associations-file-brief-in-defense-of-fair-use
[36] http://www.hathitrust.org/laboratorium.net/archive/2012/05/18/gbs_oral_argument_report_in_hathitrust
[37] http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/digital/copyright/article/52891-hathitrust-authors-guild-file-motions-for-summary-judgment-in-digitization-battle.html
[38] http://laboratorium.net/archive/2012/07/08/hathitrust_summary_judgment_motions_fair_use
[39] http://laboratorium.net/archive/2012/10/10/hathitrust_wins
[40] http://blog.lib.umn.edu/copyrightlibn/2012/10/authors-guild-v-hathi-trust-a-win-for-copyrights-public-interest-purpose.html
[41] http://copyright.columbia.edu/copyright/2012/10/11/court-rules-on-hathitrust-and-fair-use/
[42] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/10/authors-guild-vhathitrustdecision
[43] http://www.districtdispatch.org/2012/10/lca-comments-on-authors-guild-v-hathitrust-decision/
[44] http://www.nfb.org/national-federation-blind-applauds-landmark-court-ruling
[45] http://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/increasing-importance-digital-fair-use-reacti
[46] http://www.cic.net/Home/NewsAndPubs/News/12-10-11/Favorable_Ruling_in_HathiTrust_Fair-Use_Case_a_Big_Win_for_CIC_Universities.aspx
[47] http://laboratorium.net/archive/2013/02/27/hathitrust_appeal_the_authors_guilds_opening_brief
[48] http://www.hathitrust.org/around_the_web
[49] http://www.hathitrust.org/trac
[50] http://www.hathitrust.org/documents/permissions_agreement.pdf
[51] http://www.hathitrust.org/take_down_policy