What Journalists Need to Know: Online Lending Library Loses Court Battle Over Copyright Violations

Online libraries have been an invaluable resource after many libraries closed during the peak of the pandemic. Even now, physical libraries have had to reduce their hours of operation due to the reemergence of the virus. However, their online counterparts have long filled a gap that was created when the world shifted. These online archives provide free access to hundreds and thousands of scanned library books. Unfortunately, there is one site in particular that has faced legal challenges due to issues with copyright law. 

The Internet Archive, a San Francisco-based nonprofit, offered a massive library of scanned books for years. However, on August 28, the website's lengthy court battle came to an end. This beloved resource lost its legal fight, a decision that could significantly impact the future of online library archives.

The Internet Archive launched a program called the National Emergency Library (NEL) in March 2020 due to library closures that suddenly left students, researchers, and readers unable to access millions of books. The nonprofit sought to help those under stay-at-home orders obtain access to the books they still needed, pandemic or not. The NEL faced backlash almost immediately after the launch, facing accusations that its service was equivalent to piracy. The issue seemed to stem from the Internet Archive letting people borrow any number of books at the same time, as opposed to one at a time as other services have done. In response to the backlash, the nonprofit reverted to the standard one-at-a-time lending rule. However, multiple major publishers had already taken legal action against the Internet Archive; the change came too late.

The court ruled in favor of the publishers, saying that the content on the website consisted of derivative works and that its copying and lending activities were not transformative in any way. The Archive filed an appeal at the end of those proceedings. 

Chris Freeland, the Archive’s director of library services, issued an official statement:

“We are disappointed in today’s opinion about the Internet Archive’s digital lending of books that are available electronically elsewhere. We are reviewing the court’s opinion and will continue to defend the rights of libraries to own, lend, and preserve books.”

The appeal did permit the Archive to continue operating for several months without further opposition, based on the argument that it was a nonprofit organization rather than a commercial entity.

But the Archive was not out of the woods and faced more legal trouble later that same year. The nonprofit's previous legal issues were limited to its online book archive, but it also offered a vast collection of music and major labels such as Sony and Universal Music Group took legal action, alleging copyright infringement. This case is still moving through the court system and could result in damages of up to $400 million.

More than 500,000 books were removed from the Archive as part of a petition to publishers to overturn the lower court's ruling, and now the Archive's Wayback Machine is at risk. This has been an invaluable resource for journalists, as it preserves copies of past web pages.

The loss of these books is a huge blow to those who’ve relied on the Archive for an easy way to find books that they may not necessarily find, even in large cities. Other digital preservation projects do exist, but it is troubling to think that they too might eventually find themselves under fire someday. The Internet Archive, despite this huge loss, will continue to defend the rights of all libraries.