Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Rejecting a decade-long attack on Google's mass reproduction of millions of books as well as its presentation of “snippets” ' sections of works set alongside information on how readers can buy the books ' the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit court decided that Google Books has a “highly convincing transformative purpose” and thus is a protected fair use for which the company cannot be held liable under the Copyright Act.
Circuit Court Pierre Leval, Jose Cabranes and Barrington Parker made the decision in The Authors Guild v. Google Books, 13-4829 (Second Cir., Oct. 16, 2015). The appeals court upheld a 2013 grant of summary judgment in Google's favor by then-Southern District Judge Denny Chin, who found fair use in a decision that ruled in favor of the company's 2004 Library Project, in which libraries and the company collaborated on the mass digitization of library books. Since the project's inception, libraries have downloaded more than 2.7 million digital copies of their own books.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.