Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

黄山的油菜花黄山的油菜花
0

在一场牵动版权保护与公共利益的法律较量中,互联网档案馆在未经出版商批准出借扫描电子书的上诉中败诉。这一判决结果由美国第二巡回上诉法院在周三的裁决中公布,其核心观点在于,互联网档案馆的数字图书馆“允许大规模复制,从而剥夺了创作者的报酬,削弱了创作新作品的动力”。

互联网档案馆与出版商的争议

互联网档案馆自成立以来,一直致力于通过“开放图书馆”系统提供实体书的数字扫描服务。这一服务基于“受控数字借阅”原则,即每次借阅等同于购买实体书,旨在避免盗版问题。然而,这一模式与OverDrive等项目存在本质区别,后者是基于出版商的条款出售电子书的限时许可证。

随着COVID-19大流行期间,互联网档案馆在2020年推出国家紧急图书馆,允许无限数量的人访问同一电子书副本,这引发了四家主要出版商(Hachette、企鹅兰登书屋、Wiley和HarperCollins)的联合诉讼。诉讼指出,互联网档案馆的此类行为构成“工业规模的蓄意数字盗版”。

法院裁定与版权平衡

在周三的裁决中,法院承认了互联网档案馆数字图书馆的双重影响:一方面,电子书许可费可能给图书馆带来负担,减少对创作作品的获取;另一方面,作者有权在复制和传播其原创作品时获得补偿。法院坚持了版权法中对公共利益竞争性要求的平衡。

未来展望与公众参与

互联网档案馆图书馆服务主管克里斯-弗里兰在网站上发表的文章中表示,对这一判决感到失望,并强调将继续捍卫图书馆拥有、出借和保存图书的权利。同时,弗里兰鼓励公众通过签名请愿的方式,参与恢复被出版商限制访问的50万册图书的访问权。

结语

此判决不仅对互联网档案馆构成了挑战,也引发了版权保护与公共利益之间复杂而深刻的辩论。未来,互联网档案馆及其支持者可能需要寻找新的途径,平衡版权保护与公共获取之间的关系,以满足公众对知识和信息的渴望。


read more

Views: 0

0

发表回复

您的邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用 * 标注