May 2024 Roundup of Copyright News

In May, the U.S. Supreme Court was unusually busy with copyright cases, as were lower courts around the country. Here is a quick snapshot of some of copyright-related activities that occurred during the month of May as well as a few events to look forward to in June.

Copyright Alliance Activities

Copyright Alliance Submits Comments to IP Office of Singapore on Proposed Copyright Exception: On May 17, the Copyright Alliance, joined by the European Publishers Council, submitted comments to the IP Office of Singapore and the Ministry of Law of Singapore in response to a Public Consultation regarding the proposal for a new exception permitting circumvention of technological protection measures (TPMs) to use copyrighted works for “computational data analysis” (i.e., text and data mining). The comments argue that the exception violates provisions of the U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement and exacerbates concerns over Berne Convention obligations and compliance.

Copyright Alliance Celebrates 17th Anniversary: May 17 marked the 17th anniversary of the Copyright Alliance’s inception. To commemorate this milestone, we shared accomplishments across our social media channels throughout this month, ones that our team is proud to have achieved, including offering a wealth of educational materials on our website, spreading awareness about the importance of copyright, keeping Congress and other policymakers apprised of key copyright issues, successfully supporting key legislation such as the CASE Act, the MMA, the PLSA, and much more.

Copyright Alliance Blog on Turning Books to Movies: We explored in this blog post, three copyright-related tips for authors to keep in mind as they look to turn their books into big and small screen adaptations.

CCB Status Update: At the end of May 2024, 858 total cases had been filed with the Copyright Claims Board (CCB). Of these claims, 360 are “smaller claims.” In at least 228 of all cases, the claimant is using legal counsel. At least 746 of the cases involve infringement claims, 152 involve Section 512(f) misrepresentation claims, and 28 involve claims for declarations of noninfringement. The eCCB docket currently shows that the works at issue in these cases are as follows: Pictorial Graphic & Sculpture (358 cases); Literary Works (131); Motion Picture and Audiovisual Works (183); Sound Recordings (83); Musical Works (59); and some cases include claims for multiple works. One-hundred and eight foreign residents have filed claims. Of all the cases filed, 712 have been dismissed for the following reasons: Due to Respondent’s Opt-Out (84); Due to Failure to Amend Noncompliant Claim (350); Registration Issues (16); Due to Failure to Provide Proof of Service of Process (133); Claimant Withdrawal and Dismissal of Claims (67); Bad Faith Claimant (14); and Settlement (48). There are 61 active proceedings and 24 final determinations.

Register Perlmutter and Former USPTO Director Iancu Discuss AI and IP at AI Expo: On May 7, the Special Competitive Studies Project (SCSP) and the Council for Innovation Promotion (C4IP) co-hosted a Fireside Chat titled AI and IP: Can AI Generated Creations and Inventions be Protected? Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office, alongside Andrei Iancu, Partner at Sullivan & Cromwell and former USPTO Director, spoke about the implications of AI on patents and copyrights and on U.S. innovation and competitiveness. Register Perlmutter spoke to the human authorship requirement for copyrightability, the Office’s ongoing AI study, and the Office’s recent decisions regarding registration applications for works with AI-generated elements.

USCO Publishes Report on Effects of Pandemic on Copyright-Reliant Industries: On May 23, the U.S. Copyright Office published a report titled The Resilience of Creativity: An Examination of the COVID-19 Impact on Copyright-Reliant Industries and Their Subsequent Recovery. The report showed that copyright-reliant industries experienced a substantial downturn and a decrease in revenue of $21.7 billion as a result of the pandemic, but compared to the broader U.S. economy, the effect was smaller.

HJC IP Subcommittee Holds Hearing on IP Enforcement by the Executive Branch: On May 7, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet (HJC IP) held a hearing titledIntellectual Property: Enforcement Activities by the Executive Branch. The hearing examined enforcement of intellectual property (IP) in the United States, with a focus on U.S. agencies and government entities charged with IP enforcement-related tasks. Witnesses included Josh Goldfoot, Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Criminal Division; Michael Ball, Deputy Director, National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center and Deputy Assistant Director, Homeland Security Investigations Global Trade Division; and Brandon Lord, Deputy Director, National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center and Executive Director, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Trade Policy and Programs Directorate. Overall, the hearing focused on the enforcement of IP laws by the executive branch, with a particular focus on the Biden administration’s approach and the significant economic losses attributed to inadequate enforcement, especially due to counterfeit goods predominantly originating from China.

Senator Schumer Releases AI Roadmap: On May 15, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), along with Senators Rounds (R-SD), Heinrich (D-NM), and Young (R-IN), released their bipartisan Senate AI Working Group’s AI roadmap titled Driving U.S. Innovation in Artificial Intelligence. The roadmap focuses on boosting American leadership in AI technology, proposing $32 billion in annual funding by 2026 for AI research and development. The roadmap does not call for specific legislation but directs relevant committees to review and consider certain issues. In terms of AI and copyright-related issues, the working group directs relevant Congressional committees to consider the impacts of AI on professional content creators and publishers; federal policy issues, including data sets that include sensitive personal data or are protected by copyright, legislation that protects against the unauthorized use of one’s name, image, likeness, and voice in the context of AI, which is consistent with First Amendment principles; appropriate actions to ensure U.S. leadership on intellectual property and copyright issues based on the results of existing and forthcoming reports from the U.S. Copyright Office and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on issues concerning AI and IP/copyright law; and legislation regarding participation in international AI research or partnerships, giving due consideration to the potential threats to research security and intellectual property.

Senate Committee on Appropriations Holds LOC FY2025 Budget Hearing: On May 15, the Senate Appropriations Committee’s Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch held a hearing titled A Review of the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Requests for the Library of the Congress and the Architect of the Capitol. The hearing featured Dr. Carla Hayden, Librarian of Congress, and Joseph DiPietro, Acting Architect of the Capitol, as witnesses. Chairman of the Subcommittee, Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), asked Dr. Hayden what the impact would be if the Library of Congress had to operate at or below the FY24 request level. Dr. Hayden replied that this would impact, among other initiatives, the modernization of various products and services including the Enterprise Copyright System (ECS). Dr. Hayden noted that “great strides” have been made on the ECS and stated that efforts on this front had “a lot of public and stakeholder interest.”

Senator Warner Urges USCO to Expand Copyright Exemption to Circumvent TPMs to Address AI Security Risks and Biases: On May 24, Co-Chair of the Senate Cybersecurity Caucus, Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), sent a letter to the U.S. Copyright Office, urging it to address security, safety, and bias risks arising from the use of generative AI models. Senator Warner stated that the Office should expand the exemption to circumventing technological protection measures protecting copyrighted works for good-faith security research, by also permitting “‘good-faith testing, investigation, and/or correction of a security flaw or vulnerability’ in computer programs.” Further, the letter suggests the expansion as an alternative to a petition for new exemption for the security research pertaining to generative AI models, submitted by Jonathan Weiss of Chinnu, Inc., and opposed by many Copyright Alliance members, among others. The Senator noted that an expansion of the exception should not be permitted for research that would undermine authenticity and provenance of technological measures in an AI model and not otherwise facilitate copyright infringement.

NMPA Sends Letters to Congress On Section 115 Licensing System; Criticizes Spotify Over Cutting Royalties Payable to Songwriters: On May 21, the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) sent letters to both the Senate and House Judiciary Committees requesting that the statutory license in section 115 of the Copyright Act be changed to allow rightsholders to choose whether to license through The Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC) using the statutorily set royalty rates established through section 115 or to withdraw from The MLC and privately negotiate the rate if they meet certain conditions. This was following events where NMPA criticized Spotify and sent a demand letter to the platform over the unauthorized use of publishers’ musical works in lyrics, videos, and podcasts on the platform, noting that such uses should have been negotiated separately with rightsholders. NMPA also raised concerns over the platform’s rumored “remix” feature, which would allow users to “speed up, mash up, and otherwise edit” songs. NMPA President and CEO David Israelite stated that “Spotify once again has gone to war with songwriters. In addition to Spotify’s improper use of the ‘bundle’ definition to lower its payments to songwriters and publishers, the platform appears to be rife with unlicensed musical works. [W]e warned Spotify that they will be held accountable for infringement from using songs and lyrics in videos and podcasts which require licenses that it has not secured. Before Spotify’s ‘bundling’ betrayal, we may have been able to work together to fix this problem, but they have chosen the hard road by coming after songwriters once again.”

SCOTUS Holds There is No Time Limit for Recovering Damages in Cases Filed Before the Expiration of a Statute of Limitations: On May 9, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in a 6-3 decision written by Justice Kagan, that there is no time limit on monetary recovery when a copyright owner possessing a timely claim is entitled to damages, no matter when the infringement occurred. The case stems from claims brought by respondent Sherman Nealy, who invoked the discovery rule to sue Warner Chappell Music for copyright infringements going back ten years. Importantly, the Court did not directly address the discovery rule, explaining that the issue was “not properly presented” and stating that “we assume without deciding that a claim is timely under [§507(b) of the Copyright Act] if brought within three years of when the plaintiff discovered an infringement, no matter when the infringement happened.” Justice Gorsuch, joined by Alito and Thomas, dissented, arguing that the decision was premature given that the Court may soon take on the discovery rule directly and render the current decision “a dead letter.” Justice Gorsuch stated that “rather than devote our time to this case, I would have dismissed it as improvidently granted and awaited another squarely presenting the question whether the Copyright Act authorizes the discovery rule.”

SCOTUS Denies Cert in Copyright Statute of Limitations Case: On May 20, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the cert petition in the case Hearst Newspapers, L.L.C. v. Martinelli, which would have squarely addressed the issue of whether the Copyright Act’s three-year statute of limitations permits the discovery rule that allows copyright owners to bring legal claims within three years of discovering an infringement. The case was brought in 2021 by photographer Antonio Martinelli against Hearst for the unlicensed uses of his photos in newspapers and websites since 2017, though Martinelli did not discover the infringement until 2018. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled for Martinelli and upheld the discovery rule. Justices Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas indicated their skepticism of the discovery rule earlier this month in their dissent in the case Warner Chappel Music v. Nealy, where the Court ruled that damages may be collected for infringements, no matter when they occurred.

Authors File Class Action AI Lawsuit Against NVIDIA: On May 2, two authors, Andres Dubus III and Susan Orlean, filed a class-action lawsuit against NVIDIA over the unauthorized use of the authors’ books in training NVIDIA’s series of large language models (LLM) called NeMo Megatron-GPT. Filed in the district court for the Northern District of California, the complaint alleges that the plaintiffs’ books were contained in the Books3 dataset, located within another dataset known as “The Pile,” and that this dataset was used to train NVIDIA’s LLMs. The plaintiffs allege a single count of direct copyright infringement.

Authors File Class Action AI Lawsuit Against Databricks and MosaicML: On May 2, two authors, Rebecca Makkai and Jason Reynolds, filed a class-action lawsuit against Databricks and MosaicML over the unauthorized use of the authors’ books in training MosaicML’s series of large language models (LLMs) called MosaicML Pretrained Transformer (MPT), which Databricks distributes. Filed in the district court for the Northern District of California, the complaint alleges that the plaintiffs’ books were contained in the Books3 dataset which was contained in the “RedPajama—Books” dataset that was allegedly copied and used to train MPT. The plaintiffs allege direct copyright infringement against MosaicML and vicarious copyright infringement against Databricks.

Hearing Held on Motions to Dismiss in Andersen v. Stability AI: On May 8, a hearing on motions to dismiss was held in a class action case brought in the Northern District of California by visual artists against multiple AI companies for the unauthorized use of plaintiffs’ works as training material for their AI models. During the hearing, attorneys for defendants Midjourney, Deviant Art, Runway, and Open AI took turns urging Judge Orrick to dismiss a variety of claims related to direct and secondary copyright infringement, inducement, 1202(b) DMCA violations, and trade dress violations. Counsel for Plaintiffs countered that they had sufficiently alleged infringement and DMCA claims, that they have shown evidence that all the defendants utilize AI models that were trained on the LAION database, and that their claims should proceed to the summary judgment stage. Prior to the hearing, Judge Orrick issued a proceedings and tentative rulings order, in which he indicated that he is inclined to allow plaintiffs to file a Second Amended Complaint, deny all motions to dismiss the direct and induced copyright infringement claims, and grant motions to dismiss the DMCA claims.

Court Holds That Claims Made By X Corp. Against Data Scraping Company Are Preempted by Copyright Law: On May 9, the district court for the Northern District of California granted motions to dismiss made by defendant, Bright Data Ltd., a data-scaping company, in the case brought against it by X Corp., over Bright Data’s circumventing X’s anti-scraping technology, scraping X’s data, and selling the data. The court noted that “the extent to which public data may be freely copied from social media platforms, even under the banner of scraping, should generally be governed by the Copyright Act …” The court provided X Corp. with leave to amend its complaint.

IA’s Motion to Dismiss Record Label Lawsuit Denied: On May 15, a judge in the Southern District of New York issued an order denying the Internet Archive’s (IA) attempt to dismiss a copyright infringement lawsuit brought against it by Universal Music Group (UMG) and other major record labels. The case stems from the Internet Archive’s “Great 78” project, which began in 2018 and involves the collection, digitization, and distribution of sound recordings captured on physical 78-rpm gramophone records. In 2023, the record labels sued the Internet Archive, claiming the organization made unauthorized reproductions of thousands of copyright protected sound recordings and “then willfully uploaded, distributed, and digitally transmitted those illegally copied sound recordings millions of times.” In its motion to dismiss, the Internet Archive claimed its activity qualified as fair use, but also claimed that the lawsuit should be dismissed because it was filed after the three-year statute of limitations had passed—an argument based on a cease and desist letter it received more than three years before the suit was filed. In denying the motion, Judge Maxine Chesney explained that it wasn’t clear whether the statute of limitations had expired on all works at issue in the case because the letter did not mention the infringement of specific works. However, Judge Chesney said that the defendants may use the letter to show one or more of the alleged acts of infringement at a later stage in the proceedings. In addition to the Internet Archive’s motion, co-defendant the Kahle-Austin Foundation’s motion to dismiss was also denied because the court found that plaintiffs sufficiently alleged that the Foundation was likely aware of the allegedly infringing activity and may have contributed to it.

The MLC Sues Spotify Over Bundled Music-Audiobooks Subscription Plan: On, May 16, The Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC) sued Spotify over the platform’s decision to bundle music and audiobooks together in its paid Premium subscription plan, which the platform reasoned would re-categorize the kind of royalties payable to publishers and songwriters. The MLC argues that Spotify’s decision violates Section 115 of the Copyright Act, and results in severe underreporting and underpayment of mechanical royalties, stating that there was nothing new about the new bundle plan to warrant such measures. The MLC’s CEO Kris Ahrend stated, “The MLC was designated by the Register of Copyrights to administer the blanket license and is the only entity with the statutory mandate to collect and distribute blanket license royalties and take legal action to enforce royalty payment obligations. The MLC takes seriously its legal responsibility to take action on behalf of our Members when we believe usage reporting and royalty payments are materially incorrect.”

Jury Finds Cheat Software Infringes Video Game Developer’s Copyright: On May 24, a jury in the U.S. District Court of the Western District of Washington found that video game cheat code developer, Phoenix Digital (Phoenix), was liable for copyright infringement, awarding plaintiff video game company, Bungie, $63,210 in damages. In 2021, Bungie sued Phoenix, owner and operator of the AimJunkies website, for hacking into Bungie’s video game Destiny 2 and copying the game’s software code to make and sell cheat software on AimJunkies. Bungie’s allegations that Phoenix violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act by circumventing copyright protection measures proceeded to arbitration, where Bungie was awarded $4 million in damages. Phoenix’s appeal of that arbitration ruling is still in progress.

Court Awards Video Game Company $14.5 Million in Damages in Default Judgment Against Cheat Code Distributors: On May 28, the district court for the Central District of California awarded video game publisher, Activision Publishing, more than $14 million in damages and attorneys fees in a default judgment against video game cheat code developers and distributors including a German company, EngineOwning UG, and several individuals.

Cox Appeals in Sony v. Cox Case Over Evidentiary Concerns: On May 22, Internet Service Provider (ISP), Cox Communications, Inc., filed its opening brief in its appeal in Sony Music Entertainment v. Cox Communications, Inc., where the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit had overturned parts of a jury verdict under which Cox had been held liable for $1 billion for its subscribers’ infringement of 10,017 songs owned by the record label plaintiffs. In the appeal, Cox argues that the district court improperly denied Cox’s motion to reopen discovery in light of allegations that the plaintiffs’ evidence of infringement was recreated at a later date.

UK MPs Publish Report on Music and AI Appropriation: On May 1, UK’s All-Party Parliamentary Group (APGG) on Music, an informal group of members from the House of Commons and House of Lords, issued a report titled Artificial Intelligence and the Music Industry—Master or Servant?. The report details survey results of UK adults that revealed four out of five UK adults agreed that the law should prevent an artist’s music from being used without authorization to train AI models and that 77% of UK adults agreed that AI-generated music, which does not acknowledge the original music’s creators, amounts to theft. The report also lays out recommendations from the APGG on Music, including that the UK government should create a pro-creative industries AI bill to protect copyright, introduce new rights and recommendations on labelling and record keeping, and enhance “personality rights.”

UK Legislators Criticize Government’s Passive Approach to AI Copyright Infringement: On May 2, Baroness Stowell of Beeston, Chair of the Communications and Digital Committee, sent a letter to Rt Michelle Donelan MP, UK Secretary of State for Science, Innovation, and Technology, in response to the government’s report on generative AI and large language models (LLMs). The letter notes that the UK government’s actions and record on copyright as implicated by AI LLMs is “inadequate and deteriorating” and that “[t]his trajectory is concerning” as it could have negative consequences on smaller publishers.

UN Human Rights Office Publishes Report on AI Risks, Touching on IP Rights: The United Nations (UN) Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner published a paper titled Taxonomy of Human Rights Risks Connected to Generative AI, which outlines concerns and impacts of generative AI training on works protected by intellectual property law in a section on AI’s adverse impact on the right to own property. The document gives several examples of these risks, including where generative AI models are trained on large quantities of text scraped from the internet, where AI output is similar to original works, and where AI output results in direct reproductions of original works.

UN General Assembly Adopts AI Resolution That Includes IP Provision: On March 21, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted a resolution titled Seizing the opportunities of safe, secure, and trustworthy artificial intelligence systems for sustainable development, which encourages Member States to implement “appropriate safeguards to respect intellectual property rights, including copyright-protected content, while promoting innovation.”

UK Parliament Issues Third Report on Governance of AI: On May 28, the UK House of Commons Science, Innovation, and Technology Committee published its third report on the governance of AI, which examines domestic and international developments in the governance and regulation of AI and provides conclusions and recommendations for future, incoming members of the Parliament. The report contains a section on copyright issues, where the government notes unsuccessful attempts for a working group comprised of representatives from the technology, creative, and research sectors to agree on a code of practice concerning the use of copyrighted works for AI use. The report urges the current government or successor administration to conclude discussions on the use of copyrighted works for AI training and to reach an implementable approach. According to the report, such an approach may include an agreement of financial settlement for past infringements, a negotiation of a licensing regime for future uses, and an establishment of a new entity to operationalize the agreement. The report also notes that if a voluntary approach cannot be achieved, the government should enforce these measures in cooperation with international partners.

Save the Date For…

WIPO U.S. Summer School on Intellectual Property: From June 3 to June 14, the Center for Intellectual Property x Innovation Policy (C-IP2) at George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School is partnering with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to host the seventh iteration of the 2024 WIPO U.S. Summer School on Intellectual Property. This two-week summer course will be held online-only to accommodate participants from all over the world, providing an opportunity for students “to acquire a deeper knowledge of each domain of IP and of the role and functions of WIPO.” The program consists of lectures, case studies, simulation exercises, and group discussions on selected IP topics. More information is available on the registration page.

VLANY Four-Part Film and TV Workshop: Starting June 4, the New York Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts (VLANY) is hosting a four-part Film and TV Workshop Series that will address the legal essentials of filmmaking. The four sessions will cover vital legal aspects for filmmakers, from contract negotiation strategies and rights clearances to music licensing and option agreements. The first session will focus on Contract Essentials for Filmmakers. On June 12, the second session on rights and clearance misconceptions will provide an overview of rights and clearance best practices in connection with television, film, and new media productions. On June 18, the third session on music licensing for film and television is tailored toward musicians who want to learn about the intricate world of music licensing for film and television. On June 25, the fourth session on film option agreements will focus on what creators should do (and not do) when working with a production company interested in “optioning” rights to develop a film, series, show, podcast, or other type of production.

RightsClick and Webinar on IP Strategies: On June 6 at 12 p.m. ET, RightsClick and will co-host a webinar titled Protecting Your Passion: Essential IP Strategies. The event will provide artists, designers, photographers, and other independent creators and brands with information on how they can protect their works; clarify the differences among trademarks, copyrights, and patents; identify actions to take against scammers; register their works for copyright; and much more. The session will also include a case study of a sculptor and share their experiences in safeguarding creative works. More information is available on the registration page.

Copyright Society Annual Meeting: From June 9 to June 11, the Copyright Society will host its 2024 Annual Meeting, which will take place in Cleveland, Ohio. The meeting provides members of the copyright and entertainment industries with two and a half days of copyright law panels, networking opportunities, and other events. More information is available on the registration page.

A2IM Indie Week: From June 10 to 13, the American Association of Independent Music (A2IM) will host Indie Week in New York City, NY. Held annually, Indie Week is the largest gathering of the independent music community. Running for more than 15 years, and with over 1200 attendees, it features 60 panels and workshops, 1800 curated business meetings, and countless opportunities for the independent music sector’s unique needs. The event draws labels, distributors, DSPs, agencies, and more; and participants can expect three days of discussions and networking. More information is available on the registration page.

CCC Course on Copyright 101 for Academia: On June 11 from 1:30-3:30 p.m. ET, Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) is hosting an instructor-led course titled Copyright 101 for Academia. The class will provide “a look at copyright law and its impact on college and university faculty, staff members, and students in colleges and universities.” The course will offer group discussions, an analysis of real-world scenarios to help provide a foundational understanding of U.S. copyright law and best practices in higher education, and a Q&A session. More information is available on the registration page.

USPTO LGBTQIA+ Proud Innovation Webinar: On June 12 from 3-4 p.m. ET, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will host its annual Proud Innovation 2024 webinar in honor of LGBTQIA+ creators and entrepreneurs. The event will feature founders from three companies in the LGBTQIA+ entrepreneur community who will share their stories of getting their products to consumers. The speakers will also share how they built and marketed their businesses through networking, including how they found those opportunities. More information is available on the registration page.

VLANY Legal Guide and Q&A for Visual Artists: On June 19 from 5-6 p.m. ET, the New York Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts (VLANY) is hosting a webinar on the basics of what visual artists need to know regarding their legal rights, creative assets, and how to protect them. The session will provide an overview of copyright rights, exceptions, such as fair use, and more. The speaker is Carol J. Steinberg, attorney and visual arts professor. More information is available on the registration page.

MdVLA Art Law Virtual Clinic: On June 22 from 1-4 p.m. ET, the Maryland Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts (MDVLA) is hosting a virtual Art Law Clinic, and is inviting all creative entrepreneurs to sign up for a 30 minute session with a volunteer attorney to discuss issues and questions regarding IP protections. Registration is $5 and is non-refundable. More information is available on the registration page.

Deadline for Currently Designated MLC and DLC to Submit Reply Comments to USCO on Whether to Continue Their Existing Designations: June 28 is the deadline to submit reply comments to the U.S. Copyright Office’s notification of inquiry required by the Music Modernization Act regarding whether the existing designations of the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC) and Digital Licensee Coordinator (DLC) should be continued. Reply comments by the currently designated MLC and DLC must be submitted by July 29.

Oral Arguments in Hachette v. Internet Archive Case: On June 28 at 10 a.m. ET, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals will hold oral arguments in Internet Archive’s (IA) appeal in Hachette v. Internet Archive, where the lower court held that IA’s practices of mass digitization and distribution of digital copies of plaintiff-publishers’ literary works (also known as Controlled Digital Lending or CDL) did not qualify as a fair use. Livestream audio of oral arguments can be found on the court’s webpage.

If you aren’t already a member of the Copyright Alliance, you can join today by completing our Individual Creator Members membership form! Members gain access to monthly newsletters, educational webinars, and so much more — all for free!

get blog updates