header-logo header-logo

Bottom of the class

06 May 2010 / Jane Foulser McFarlane
Issue: 7416 / Categories: Features , Intellectual property
printer mail-detail

What are the implications for Google’s proposed online library? asks Jane Foulser McFarlane

The Business Section of the Daily Telegraph recently reported that The American Society of Media Photographers (ASMP) along with other representative bodies of illustrators, graphic artists and photographers have filed a lawsuit in New York, commencing a Class action against Google’s proposed online library, a database, containing 18 million books. There is already a similar lawsuit in the US District court for the Southern District of New York, which was commenced in 2005 by authors and publishers and which is close to a settlement agreement. The ASMP group were prevented from joining the initial Class action, but concerns that the Google database will infringe the rights of authors and artistic contributors to the books have resulted in further litigation. What are the implications for Google’s proposed project?

Ambitious

Google’s plan is ambitious, innovative and will be well received by the majority of the internet surfing public, if not by the creators of the literary works contained in the database.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll