The Internet and social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter can present conundrums when juxtaposing them with the law as it is written, and certain individual posts. For example, in 2012, a libel lawsuit manifested after the American Career College terminated an employee. After termination, the ex-employee allegedly posted libelous information about the College on Wikipedia.
Creative Commons (CC) released their 4.0 versions of licenses on November 26, 2013. CC initially planned this release for December of 2012, but better late than never.
Today, Judge Chen in the United States District Court in the Southern District of New York held that Google’s scanning of over twenty million books for research purposes, snippet views, data mining, text mining, bibliographic research, etymological research, to aid in viewing for handicapped… is fair use.
Google Digitization Case
A New York federal district court holds linking is not direct infringement, but could be indirect infringement
I was recently reviewing our Media Library’s preservation policy and was able to reminisce about some concepts currently discussed in section 108 of the United States Copyright Act.
On Monday, July 1, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the authors who are a party to this suit may not be allowed to file a class action lawsuit against Google. The intermediate court reasoned that the lower court first needs to decide whether Google’s scanning of print books for the purposes of research, preview, and indexing is a fair use.
On February 22, 2013, President Obama issued a directive for each federal agency with over $100 million in annual conduct of research and development expenditures to develop a plan to support increased public access to the results of research funded by the federal government.