Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Authors and publishers began to argue that Google's Library Partner project, despite the limitations on what results they provided to users, violated copyrights as they were not asked ahead of time by Google to place scans of their books online. By August 2005, Google stated they would stop scanning in books until November 2005 as to give ...
Google Books (previously known as Google Book Search, Google Print, and by its code-name Project Ocean) [1] is a service from Google that searches the full text of books and magazines that Google has scanned, converted to text using optical character recognition (OCR), and stored in its digital database. [2]
HathiTrust, 755 F.3d 87 (2d Cir. 2014), is a United States copyright decision finding search and accessibility uses of digitized books to be fair use. The Authors Guild, other author organizations, and individual authors claimed that the HathiTrust Digital Library had infringed their copyrights through its use of books scanned by Google.
Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Mario Costeja González was a decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union holding that an internet search engine operator is responsible for the processing that it carries out of personal information which appears on web pages published by third parties.
After launching in 2017, YouTube TV gained popularity for its low-cost entertainment service that attracted many people to cut the cord on their cable. Users can watch anything they wanted for $35 ...
Google agreed to a $125 million payout, $45 million of that to be paid to rightsholders whose books were scanned without permission. The Google Book Search Settlement Agreement allowed for legal protection for Google's scanning project, even though neither side changed its position about whether scanning books was fair use or copyright ...
Hachette Book Group, Inc. v. Internet Archive, No. 20-cv-4160 (JGK), 664 F.Supp.3d 370 (S.D.N.Y. 2023), WL 2623787 (S.D.N.Y. 2023), was a case in which the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York determined that the Internet Archive, a registered library, committed copyright infringement by scanning and lending ...
YouTube responded by stating that it "goes far beyond its legal obligations in assisting content owners to protect their works". [11] During the same court battle, Viacom won a court ruling requiring YouTube to hand over 12 terabytes of data detailing the viewing habits of every user who has watched videos on the site.