Case: The Authors Guild v. Google, Inc.

1:05-cv-08136 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Filed Date: Sept. 20, 2005

Closed Date: Feb. 17, 2015

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In 2004, Google and several major universities announced a project to scan and digitize the collections of the universities' research libraries. Google has since scanned more than 12 million books. The libraries retained digital copies of the books (see Authors Guild v. HathiTrust, in related cases). Google also kept copies of the books, which it added to its Google Books database. The content of these books was made available for online searching, with the full content of out-of-copyright work…

In 2004, Google and several major universities announced a project to scan and digitize the collections of the universities' research libraries. Google has since scanned more than 12 million books. The libraries retained digital copies of the books (see Authors Guild v. HathiTrust, in related cases). Google also kept copies of the books, which it added to its Google Books database. The content of these books was made available for online searching, with the full content of out-of-copyright works made available online, and with copyrighted works searchable, but visible to users only in "snippets" showing the search terms in context.

Millions of the books scanned by Google were under copyright and Google did not obtain permission to scan the books from the Rightsholders. In 2005, the Authors Guild, together with several national and international organizations purporting to represent the interest of authors and publishers, as well as certain authors and publishers, brought a class action lawsuit against Google. The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging copyright infringement. The authors sought both damages and injunctive relief, and the publishers sought injunctive relief. Google's principal defense was fair use under § 107 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 107. The case is included in the Clearinghouse because the proposed settlement agreement makes significant accommodations allowing access to the digitized works by blind or otherwise print-disabled individuals, and because important disability advocacy groups expressed their support of the settlement.

In the fall of 2006 the parties began settlement negotiations, and on October 28, 2008 the parties filed a proposed settlement agreement. Preliminary approval of the proposed settlement was granted by Judge John E. Sprizzo on November 17, 2008. Hundreds of objections were received in response to the proposed settlement, and so the parties reentered discussions for possible modifications to the proposed settlement. On November 13, 2009, the parties filed an Amended Settlement Agreement. The Court, (Judge Denny Chin) granted preliminary approval to the Amended Settlement on November 19, 2009. Authors Guild v. Google, Inc., 2009 WL 5576331 (S.D.N.Y 2009).

The Amended Settlement Agreement was 166 pages long, not including attachments. The Class addressed by the settlement consisted of all persons who, as of January 5, 2009, owned a U.S. copyright interest in one or more books implicated by a use authorized by the Amended Settlement Agreement. There were two subclasses, the Author Sub-Class and the Publisher Sub-Class. Under the Amended Settlement, Google would be authorized to continue digitizing books, and to beginning selling subscriptions to an electronic book database, to sell online access to individual books, and to sell advertising which would be placed on pages from books. The rights granted to Google in the settlement would be non-exclusive.

Rightsholders could exclude their books from some or all of the uses listed above, or elect to remove their books from the database completely. Rightsholders could also demand that Google not digitize any of their books not yet digitized. Under the settlement Google would establish a Registry which would be required to make a reasonable effort to locate Rightsholders. The Registry would receive payments from Google on behalf of Rightsholders and would in turn distribute funds to registered Rightsholders. Unclaimed funds would, after five years, be used to cover the expense of locating owners of unclaimed works, and after ten years, any additional unclaimed funds would be distributed to literary charities. Under the settlement, Google would not display in-print books unless it received express authorization from the Rightsholders, however the agreement would grant Google the right to make non-display use of in-print books, including making the content of books searchable by Google Books users. The agreement would have allowed Google to display out-of-print books until they received a request from the Rightsholder directing them to stop.

The Amended Settlement Agreement would have granted special access to academic and public libraries wishing to participate. Google would provide the library a digital copy of any book in the library's collection, either by scanning the library's copy or by giving them access to a copy of the title already in Google's database. The participating libraries would make these digital copies of their collections available to blind patrons and those with other print disabilities. In addition, certain other rights would have been granted to participating libraries under the Amended Settlement Agreement. The Amended Settlement would also have required Google to ensure that the books made available through its own services would be provided in formats accessible to people with print disabilities.

The Court received approximately 500 submissions commenting on the settlement, the overwhelming majority objecting to it. Additionally, around 6800 class members opted out. The major arguments of the objectors were that: the proposed class notice was inadequate; that the interests of certain class members including foreign authors and academic authors were inadequately represented by the representative plaintiffs; that the settlement terms were overly broad, reaching issues not within the scope of the pleadings, and releasing future claims not before the court; that the settlement was at odds with federal copyright law and that it functioned to make Google the de facto copyright holder for "orphaned works"; antitrust concerns, including that the settlement would effectively give Google a monopoly over digital books and especially over unclaimed works (while its competitors, who had been carefully obtaining permission to digitize each work rather than copying everything without authorization would be pushed out), that the proposed pricing mechanisms violated the Sherman Act, and that the settlement would unfairly entrench Google's position as the dominant online search engine; privacy concerns about Google's ability to monitor the reading patterns of users, and about its use of information provided by Rightsholders; and concerns that settlement was at odds with international law and that it placed an unfair burden on foreign copyright holders.

Among the relatively few submissions from supporters of the settlement were letters from the National Federation of the Blind (the NFB) and from the American Association of People with Disabilities. The NFB argued in its letter that the settlement should be allowed to proceed because of its terms granting access and accommodations for disabled users. The settlement would for the first time make almost all books in the collections of public libraries accessible to blind readers and to an estimated another 30,000,000 Americans unable to read printed text due to other disabilities.

The NFB would later become an intervening defendant in Authors Guild v. HathiTrust (see related cases), which was the suit filed by The Authors Guild against the academic libraries that were Google's original partners in the book scanning project. That suit was decided on its merits in favor of the defendants, with the court finding that the libraries' use of the digitized works was permissible under the fair use provisions of the Copyright Act and that to the extent that digitization provided a unique degree of access to information for the blind and to individuals with other print disabilities, such digitization was allowed under the ADA.

The Court (Judge Denny Chin) shared many of the objectors' concerns, and so in an extensive opinion dated March 22, 2011, it rejected the Amended Settlement Agreement, stipulating that it would likely approve a second amended settlement if the parties modified it so that it was an opt-in, rather than an opt-out, agreement. The opinion does not address the merits of the NFB's arguments in favor of the settlement. Authors Guild v. Google, Inc. 770 F.Supp.2d 666 (S.D.N.Y. 2011).

The parties appear to have decided against an opt-in settlement, and it seems likely that the case will proceed and will eventually be decided on its merits. On October 14, 2011, the plaintiffs filed a Fourth Amended Complaint, which appears substantially similar to the earlier complaints, except with minor rewording and with the substitution of certain named plaintiffs.

On May 31, 2012, the Judge Chin denied a motion by Google to have the claims of the associational plaintiffs (The Authors Guild and other non-individual plaintiffs) dismissed. In the same decision, the court granted class certification to the plaintiffs. Authors Guild v. Google, Inc., 282 F.R.D. 384 (S.D.N.Y. 2012). Google filed an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals (USCA) for the Second Circuit, contesting the grant of class certification. Proceedings in the District Court were stayed pending the outcome of this appeal.

On July 1, 2013, the USCA for the Second Circuit vacated the District Court's order on the grounds that class certification was premature in the absence of a determination of the merits of Google's "fair use" defense. The case was remanded without prejudice to any renewal of the motion for class certification.

On November 14, 2013, the District Court (Judge Chin) granted Google's motion for summary judgment. Judge Chin found that Google's actions were protected by fair use. It was noted that Google's actions brought significant public benefits including enabling libraries to make copies available to print-disabled individuals. The plaintiff's complaint was dismissed with prejudice.

On December 23, 2014, the plaintiffs appealed to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The Second Circuit affirmed the District Court's decision to grant summary judgment for Google on November 17, 2015, finding that Google's actions constituted fair use. The Court found that Google's making of a digital copy to provide both a search function and a snippet function were transformative uses, as they augmented public knowledge by making available information about the plaintiffs' books without providing the public with a substantial substitute for matter protected by the plaintiffs' copyright interests in the original works or derivatives of them. Additionally, the Court found that Google's profit motivation did not justify denial of fair use. Finally, the Court found that Google's program did not expose the plaintiffs to an unreasonable risk of loss of copyright value through incursions of hackers.

The case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Alex Colbert-Taylor (6/18/2013)

David Cho (12/29/2014)

Eva Richardson (12/24/2018)

Related Cases

The Authors Guild v. HathiTrust, Inc., Southern District of New York (2011)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4522355/parties/the-authors-guild-v-google-inc/


Judge(s)

Cabranes, José Alberto (Connecticut)

Chin, Denny (New York)

Leval, Pierre Nelson (New York)

Parker, Barrington Daniels Jr. (New York)

Sprizzo, John Emilio (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Boni, Michael J (Pennsylvania)

Cunard, Jeffrey Paul (New York)

Dumain, Sanford P (New York)

Keller, Bruce P (New York)

Kohn, William Irwin (Ohio)

Judge(s)

Cabranes, José Alberto (Connecticut)

Chin, Denny (New York)

Leval, Pierre Nelson (New York)

Parker, Barrington Daniels Jr. (New York)

Sprizzo, John Emilio (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Boni, Michael J (Pennsylvania)

Cunard, Jeffrey Paul (New York)

Dumain, Sanford P (New York)

Keller, Bruce P (New York)

Kohn, William Irwin (Ohio)

Larocca, Robert J (Pennsylvania)

Neuman, Kristin Heckett (New York)

Reznick, Kate (Pennsylvania)

Zack, Joanne E (Pennsylvania)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Beck, Joseph M (Georgia)

Bernstein, Robert Jay (New York)

Charnes, Adam Howard (North Carolina)

Conciatori, Jeffrey A (New York)

Drummond, David C (California)

Durie, Daralyn J. (California)

Fonoroff, Alex Seth (Georgia)

Gratz, Joseph C (California)

McGowan, David Floyd (California)

Miksch, Melissa J (California)

Raider, Ronald Lee (Georgia)

Rosloff, Genevieve P (California)

Silbert, David J (California)

Other Attorney(s)

Arato, Cynthia S (New York)

Avsec, Mark Edward (Ohio)

Band, Jonathan (District of Columbia)

Becker, Gary M (New York)

Bharara, Preetinder S. (New York)

Boccanfuso, Anthony D (New York)

Casper, Charles Blaine (Pennsylvania)

Cavanaugh, William Francis Jr (District of Columbia)

Chu, Lynn T (New York)

Chun, Marisa A (California)

Clarida, Robert William (New York)

Clopper, John Dalton (New York)

Cohn, Cindy A. (California)

Davis, John W. (California)

Dershowitz, Nathan Z (New York)

DeVore, Andrew (New York)

DeVries, Christina Jacqueline (California)

Donaldson, Richard Montgomery (Delaware)

Fetterman, Daniel J (New York)

Forrest, Katherine Bolan (New York)

Garbus, Martin (New York)

Grimmelmann, James Taylor Lewis (New York)

Guzman, Michael John (District of Columbia)

Hall, Joseph Solomon (District of Columbia)

Ho, Derek Tam (District of Columbia)

Kassam, Amin S (New York)

Kellogg, Michael K (District of Columbia)

Kornstein, William Francis (District of Columbia)

Lazebnik, Ron (New York)

Lynch, Jennifer (California)

Maggioni, Ilaria (New York)

Max, Theodore Conrad (New York)

McDermott, Mikaela Ann (New York)

Metlin, Elaine (District of Columbia)

Micheletto, Robert C (New York)

Morris, John Burnett Jr (New York)

Nimmer, David (California)

Ossola, Charles D (District of Columbia)

Pearlman, Jef (District of Columbia)

Perlman, Victor Sigmund (Pennsylvania)

Raj, Kiran Sriram (District of Columbia)

Roth, Nelson E (New York)

Rothstein, Paul S (Florida)

Rubin, Thomas Cort (Washington)

Saed, Shirley Othmana (New York)

Saito, Yasuhiro (New York)

Schruers, Matthew Christian (District of Columbia)

Schwartz, Rachel Eve (New York)

Shapiro, Alexandra A (New York)

Siavoshy, Babak (California)

Siegel, Edward Frank (Ohio)

Silverstein, Mark Lloyd (New York)

Siy, Sherman (District of Columbia)

Toren, Peter Jonathon (New York)

Turner, Robert Cunningham (New York)

Urban, Jennifer M. (California)

Weiss, Matthew J (New York)

Wiles, Alexander F (California)

Yadava, Nidhi (New York)

Zapolsky, David A (Washington)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:05-cv-08138

Docket

Nov. 17, 2015

Nov. 17, 2015

Docket
1

1:05-cv-08136

Class Action Complaint, Jury Trial Demanded

Author's Guild v. Google

Sept. 20, 2005

Sept. 20, 2005

Complaint
56

1:05-cv-08136

Declaration of Michael J. Boni in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Settlement Approval

Authors Guild v. Google

Oct. 28, 2008

Oct. 28, 2008

Declaration/Affidavit
64

1:05-cv-08136

[Proposed] Order Granting Preliminary Settlement Approval

Authors Guild v. Google

Nov. 17, 2008

Nov. 17, 2008

Order/Opinion
125

1:05-cv-08136

Letter on behalf of American Assoc. for People with Disabilities

Authors Guild v. Google

Aug. 5, 2009

Aug. 5, 2009

Pleading / Motion / Brief
716

1:05-cv-08136

Order

Author's Guild v. Google

Sept. 16, 2009

Sept. 16, 2009

Order/Opinion
720

1:05-cv-08136

Statement of Interest of the United States of America Regarding Proposed Class Settlement

Authors Guild v. Google

Sept. 18, 2009

Sept. 18, 2009

Notice Letter
765

1:05-cv-08136

Memorandum Decision

Authors Guild v. Google

Nov. 4, 2009

Nov. 4, 2009

Order/Opinion
770-1

1:05-cv-08136

Amended Preliminary Settlement Agreement

Nov. 13, 2009

Nov. 13, 2009

Settlement Agreement
772

1:05-cv-08136

Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Amended Settlement Agreement

Authors Guild v. Google

Nov. 19, 2009

Nov. 19, 2009

Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4522355/the-authors-guild-v-google-inc/

Last updated Aug. 28, 2022, 3:03 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
793

RECAP
794

RECAP
795

RECAP
798

PACER
1

COMPLAINT against Google Inc. (Filing Fee $ 250.00, Receipt Number 555987)Document filed by The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman.(laq, ) (Entered: 09/22/2005)

Sept. 20, 2005

Sept. 20, 2005

RECAP

SUMMONS ISSUED as to Google Inc.. (laq, )

Sept. 20, 2005

Sept. 20, 2005

PACER
2

RULE 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. Document filed by The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman.(laq, ) (Entered: 09/22/2005)

Sept. 20, 2005

Sept. 20, 2005

PACER

Magistrate Judge Douglas F. Eaton is so designated. (laq, )

Sept. 20, 2005

Sept. 20, 2005

PACER

Case Designated ECF. (laq, )

Sept. 20, 2005

Sept. 20, 2005

PACER
3

SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED. Google Inc. served on 9/23/2005, answer due 10/13/2005. Service was accepted by Ashok Ramani, Legal Representative, authorized to accept service of Summons in a Civil Action, Class Action Complaint, Rule 7.1 Statement, Civil Case Cover Sheet, Magistrate Judge Eaton's and Judge Sprizzo Rules along with ECF Procedures and Guidelines, on behalf of Google Inc. Document filed by The Author's Guild. (Attachments: # 1)(Dumain, Sanford) (Entered: 10/10/2005)

1

View on RECAP

2

View on PACER

Oct. 10, 2005

Oct. 10, 2005

RECAP
4

STIPULATION AND ORDER that the time for deft to respond to the complaint is extended 20 days from 10/13 to and including 11/2/05. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 10/7/05) (cd, ) (Entered: 10/12/2005)

Oct. 11, 2005

Oct. 11, 2005

RECAP

Set Answer Due Date purs. to 4 Stipulation and Order as to Google Inc. answer due on 11/2/2005. (cd, )

Oct. 11, 2005

Oct. 11, 2005

PACER
5

MOTION for Joseph M. Beck to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by Google Inc. (jco, ) (Entered: 10/12/2005)

Oct. 11, 2005

Oct. 11, 2005

RECAP
6

MOTION for Adam H. Charnes to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by Google Inc. (jco, ) (Entered: 10/12/2005)

Oct. 11, 2005

Oct. 11, 2005

RECAP
7

MOTION for an order, admitting Michael J. Boni to Appear Pro Hac Vice as counsel for Plaintiffs. Document filed by The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. Affidavit of Sanford P. Dumain attached.(sac, ) (Entered: 10/25/2005)

Oct. 24, 2005

Oct. 24, 2005

RECAP
8

MOTION for an order, admitting J. Kate Reznick to Appear Pro Hac Vice as counsel for Plaintiffs. Document filed by The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. Affidavit of Sanford P. Dumain attached.(sac, ) (Entered: 10/25/2005)

Oct. 24, 2005

Oct. 24, 2005

RECAP
9

ORDER granting 5 Motion for Joseph M. Beck to Appear Pro Hac Vice . (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 10/24/05) (jco, ) (Entered: 10/25/2005)

Oct. 25, 2005

Oct. 25, 2005

RECAP

Transmission to Attorney Admissions Clerk. Transmitted re: 9 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, to the Attorney Admissions Clerk for updating of Attorney Information. (jco, )

Oct. 25, 2005

Oct. 25, 2005

PACER
10

ORDER granting 6 Motion for Adam H. Charnes to Appear Pro Hac Vice . (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 10/24/05) (jco, ) (Entered: 10/25/2005)

Oct. 25, 2005

Oct. 25, 2005

RECAP

Transmission to Attorney Admissions Clerk. Transmitted re: 10 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, to the Attorney Admissions Clerk for updating of Attorney Information. (jco, )

Oct. 25, 2005

Oct. 25, 2005

PACER

CASHIERS OFFICE REMARK on 10 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 9 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice in the amount of $50.00, paid on 10/27/2005, Receipt Number 559555. (gm, )

Oct. 27, 2005

Oct. 27, 2005

PACER
11

ORDER that dft is granted leave to submit its motion for summary judgment not to exceed 25 pages on or before 11/30/05; plaintiffs shall submit their response to dft's motion and any cross motion; together not to exceed 25 pages on or before 1/6/06; dft shall submit its replyto plaintiffs' cross motion, if any, limited to the issues raised therein not to exceed fifteen pages, on or before 1/24/06 and oral argument shall occur on 1/30/06 at 3:00 pm. in courtoom 705, 40 Centre Street. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 10/26/05) (dle, ) (Entered: 10/31/2005)

Oct. 28, 2005

Oct. 28, 2005

RECAP

Set Deadlines/Hearings: Motions due by 11/30/2005. Replies due by 1/24/2006. Responses due by 1/6/2006 Oral Argument set for 1/30/2006 03:00 PM before Judge John E. Sprizzo. (dle, )

Oct. 28, 2005

Oct. 28, 2005

PACER
12

NOTICE of Appearance by Laura Helen Gundersheim on behalf of all plaintiffs (Gundersheim, Laura) (Entered: 11/18/2005)

Nov. 18, 2005

Nov. 18, 2005

RECAP
13

RULE 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. Document filed by Google Inc..(Bernstein, Robert) (Entered: 11/30/2005)

Nov. 30, 2005

Nov. 30, 2005

RECAP
14

ANSWER to Complaint with JURY DEMAND. Document filed by Google Inc..(Bernstein, Robert) (Entered: 11/30/2005)

Nov. 30, 2005

Nov. 30, 2005

RECAP
15

AFFIDAVIT of Sanford P. Dumain in Support re: 7 MOTION for Michael J. Boni to Appear Pro Hac Vice.. Document filed by The Author's Guild. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1# 2 Exhibit 2)(Gundersheim, Laura) (Entered: 12/09/2005)

1 Exhibit 1

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit 1

View on PACER

3 Exhibit 2

View on RECAP

Dec. 9, 2005

Dec. 9, 2005

RECAP
16

AFFIDAVIT of Sanford P. Dumain in Support re: 8 MOTION for J. Kate Reznick to Appear Pro Hac Vice.. Document filed by The Author's Guild. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1# 2 Exhibit 2)(Gundersheim, Laura) (Entered: 12/09/2005)

2 Exhibit 1

View on RECAP

3 Exhibit 2

View on RECAP

Dec. 9, 2005

Dec. 9, 2005

RECAP
17

MOTION for Alex S. Fonoroff to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Attached is Affidavit of Robert J. Bernstein in support Document filed by Google Inc.. (djc, ) (Entered: 12/16/2005)

Dec. 15, 2005

Dec. 15, 2005

RECAP
18

ORDER granting 8 Motion for J. Kate Reznick to Appear Pro Hac Vice . (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 12/13/05) (jco, ) (Entered: 12/16/2005)

Dec. 15, 2005

Dec. 15, 2005

RECAP

Transmission to Attorney Admissions Clerk. Transmitted re: 18 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, to the Attorney Admissions Clerk for updating of Attorney Information. (jco, )

Dec. 15, 2005

Dec. 15, 2005

PACER
19

ORDER granting 7 Motion for Michael J. Boni to Appear Pro Hac Vice . (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 12/13/05) (jco, ) (Entered: 12/16/2005)

Dec. 15, 2005

Dec. 15, 2005

RECAP

CASHIERS OFFICE REMARK on 19 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 18 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice in the amount of $50.00, paid on 12/22/2005, Receipt Number 564907. (jd, )

Dec. 29, 2005

Dec. 29, 2005

PACER
20

ORDER; granting 17 Motion for Alex S. Fonoroff, Esq. to Appear Pro Hac Vice (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 3/14/06) (sac, ) (Entered: 03/16/2006)

March 16, 2006

March 16, 2006

RECAP

Transmission to Attorney Admissions Clerk. Transmitted re: 20 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, to the Attorney Admissions Clerk for updating of Attorney Information. (sac, )

March 16, 2006

March 16, 2006

PACER
21

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Alex Seth Fonoroff, S on behalf of Google Inc. (Fonoroff, Alex) (Entered: 03/29/2006)

March 29, 2006

March 29, 2006

PACER
22

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jeffrey A. Conciatori on behalf of Google Inc. (Conciatori, Jeffrey) (Entered: 04/12/2006)

April 12, 2006

April 12, 2006

RECAP
23

MOTION for Ronald L. Raider to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by Google Inc. (jco, ) (Entered: 04/14/2006)

April 13, 2006

April 13, 2006

PACER
24

ORDER granting 23 Motion for Ronald L. Raider to Appear Pro Hac Vice . (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 4/18/06) (jco, ) (Entered: 04/20/2006)

April 19, 2006

April 19, 2006

RECAP

Transmission to Attorney Admissions Clerk. Transmitted re: 24 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, to the Attorney Admissions Clerk for updating of Attorney Information. (jco, )

April 19, 2006

April 19, 2006

PACER
25

NOTICE of Substitution of Attorney. Old Attorney: Robert J. Bernstein, New Attorney: Jeffrey A. Conciatori, Address: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP, 51 Madison Avenue, 22nd fl., New York, New York, United States 10010, 212-849-7000. Document filed by Google Inc.. (Conciatori, Jeffrey) (Entered: 05/09/2006)

May 9, 2006

May 9, 2006

RECAP
26

STIPULATION AND ORDER; that the law firm of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP be substituted as counsel for dft. in the place of The Law Offices of Robert J. Bernstein. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 4/27/06) (pl, ) (Entered: 05/11/2006)

May 11, 2006

May 11, 2006

RECAP
27

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Jeffrey A. Conciatori on behalf of Google Inc.. New Address: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP, 51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Fl., New York, New York, United States 10010, 212-849-7000. (Conciatori, Jeffrey) (Entered: 05/11/2006)

May 11, 2006

May 11, 2006

RECAP
28

PROTECTIVE ORDER; regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential information. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 5/16/2006) (kkc, ) (Entered: 05/18/2006)

May 17, 2006

May 17, 2006

PACER
29

CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN: Amended Pleadings due by 6/19/2006. Motions due by 7/2/2007. Discovery due by 4/9/2007. Pretrial Conference set for 10/23/2006 03:00 PM before Judge John E. Sprizzo; initial disclosures under Rule 26(a)(1) shall be exchanged by 5/19/06; disclosure of expert witnesses required under Rule 26(a)(2) (A) shall be exchanged on 2/16/07; initial expert reports shall be exchanged on 3/16/07; rebuttal expert reports shall be exchanged on 4/4/07; expert deposition shall be taken from 4/4/07 through 5/15/07. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 5/12/06) (dle, ) (Entered: 05/22/2006)

May 22, 2006

May 22, 2006

RECAP
30

RULE 26 DISCLOSURE.Document filed by Google Inc..(Raider, Ronald) (Entered: 06/09/2006)

June 9, 2006

June 9, 2006

PACER
31

RULE 26 DISCLOSURE.Document filed by Google Inc..(Raider, Ronald) (Entered: 06/12/2006)

June 12, 2006

June 12, 2006

PACER
32

MOTION to Amend/Correct the Complaint. Document filed by The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order # 2 Certificate of Service)(Dumain, Sanford) (Entered: 06/19/2006)

1

View on RECAP

2 Text of Proposed Order

View on RECAP

3 Certificate of Service

View on PACER

June 19, 2006

June 19, 2006

RECAP
33

DECLARATION of J Kate Reznick in Support re: 32 MOTION to Amend/Correct the Complaint.. Document filed by The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A (Amended Complaint)# 2 Certificate of Service)(Dumain, Sanford) (Entered: 06/19/2006)

1

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit A (Amended Complaint)

View on RECAP

3 Certificate of Service

View on PACER

June 19, 2006

June 19, 2006

RECAP
34

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 32 MOTION to Amend/Correct the Complaint.. Document filed by The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Dumain, Sanford) (Entered: 06/19/2006)

1

View on RECAP

2 Certificate of Service

View on PACER

June 19, 2006

June 19, 2006

RECAP
35

STIPULATION AND ORDER: The parties agree as follows: Plaintiffs may amend their complaint as set forth in their moving papers, and the amended class action complaint attached to the moving papers is deemed filed on June 19, 2006. Defendant shall file a responsive pleading within thirty days of the date of this stipulation and order. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 6/28/06) (js, ) (Entered: 06/30/2006)

June 29, 2006

June 29, 2006

RECAP
36

AMENDED COMPLAINT amending 1 Complaint against Google Inc.Document filed by Paul Dickson, Joseph Goulden, The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. Related document: 1 Complaint filed by Betty Miles,, Daniel Hoffman, The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang.(db, ) (Entered: 07/26/2006)

July 26, 2006

July 26, 2006

RECAP
37

ANSWER to Amended Complaint. Document filed by Google Inc.. Related document: 36 Amended Complaint, filed by Betty Miles,, Daniel Hoffman,, The Author's Guild,, Herbert Mitgang,, Paul Dickson,, Joseph Goulden,.(Charnes, Adam) (Entered: 07/26/2006)

July 26, 2006

July 26, 2006

RECAP
38

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Ronald Lee Raider on behalf of Google Inc. (Raider, Ronald) (Entered: 09/14/2006)

Sept. 14, 2006

Sept. 14, 2006

PACER
39

PROTECTIVE ORDER...regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential material.... (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 9/22/2006) (lb, ) (Entered: 09/26/2006)

Sept. 26, 2006

Sept. 26, 2006

PACER
40

NOTICE of Intent to Serve Subpoenas. Document filed by Google Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment (Part 1)# 2 Attachment (Part 2)# 3 Attachment (Part 3))(Raider, Ronald) (Entered: 09/29/2006)

2 Attachment (Part 1)

View on PACER

3 Attachment (Part 2)

View on PACER

4 Attachment (Part 3)

View on PACER

Sept. 29, 2006

Sept. 29, 2006

PACER
41

NOTICE of Intent to Serve Subpoena. Document filed by Google Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment A)(Raider, Ronald) (Entered: 10/04/2006)

2 Attachment A

View on RECAP

Oct. 4, 2006

Oct. 4, 2006

RECAP
42

NOTICE/ORDER OF WITHDRAWAL; Shannon M. McKenna an atty at Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP and one of the attorney for Plaintiff- The Author's Guild, hereby withdraws as counsel for said plaintiff. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP continues to serve as counsel for plaintiff -The Author's Guild through its atty Sanford P. Dumain who requests that all future correspondence and papers in ths action continue to be directed to him. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 10/3/06) (djc, ) (Entered: 10/10/2006)

Oct. 6, 2006

Oct. 6, 2006

PACER
43

MOTION for Hadley Perkins Roeltgen to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. (jco, ) (Entered: 10/10/2006)

Oct. 6, 2006

Oct. 6, 2006

PACER
44

AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER AND SCHEDULING ORDER: Amended Pleadings due by 6/19/2006. Motions due by 1/11/2008. Pretrial Conference set for 3/12/2007 03:00 PM before Judge John E. Sprizzo. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 10/12/06) (kco, ) (Entered: 10/17/2006)

Oct. 16, 2006

Oct. 16, 2006

PACER
45

ORDER ADMITTING ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE. Hadley Perkins Roeltgen is permitted to argue this case. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 10/12/06) (kco, ) (Entered: 10/17/2006)

Oct. 16, 2006

Oct. 16, 2006

PACER

Transmission to Attorney Admissions Clerk. Transmitted re: 45 Order Admitting Attorney Pro Hac Vice, to the Attorney Admissions Clerk for updating of Attorney Information. (kco, )

Oct. 17, 2006

Oct. 17, 2006

PACER

CASHIERS OFFICE REMARK on 45 Order Admitting Attorney Pro Hac Vice in the amount of $25.00, paid on 10/19/2006, Receipt Number 593992. (jd, )

Oct. 19, 2006

Oct. 19, 2006

PACER
46

NOTICE of Intent To Serve Subpoena. Document filed by Google Inc.. (Raider, Ronald) (Entered: 11/22/2006)

Nov. 22, 2006

Nov. 22, 2006

PACER
47

AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER REGARDING COORDIANTION AND SCHEDULING;the actions penidng in this Court are hereby coordinated for all pre-trial purposes before this Court....; The joint Protective order shall be entered simultaneously with the entry of this Order. Motions for Summary Judgment, if any, shall be filed Tuesday, March 11, 2008. The pretrial conference previously scheduled for 3/12/07 is adjourned. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 1/3/07) (djc, ) (Entered: 01/09/2007)

Jan. 8, 2007

Jan. 8, 2007

PACER
48

AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER REGARDING COORDINATION AND SCHEDULING; The captioned actions pending in this Court are hereby coordinated for a pre-trial purposes before this Court. These actions shall be referred to herein as "Coordinated Actions". Motions due by 6/9/2007., Pretrial Conference set for 7/26/2007 03:00 PM before Judge John E. Sprizzo. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 2/26/07) (djc) (Entered: 02/28/2007)

Feb. 27, 2007

Feb. 27, 2007

PACER
49

NOTICE of Change of Firm Affiliation and Entry of Appearance. Document filed by Paul Dickson, Joseph Goulden, The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. (Boni, Michael) (Entered: 04/03/2007)

April 3, 2007

April 3, 2007

PACER
50

AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER REGARDING COORDINATION AND SCHEDULING: Third party discovery due by 4/20/2006, Merits discovery due by 5/12/2008, Disclosure of expert witnesses under Rule 26(a)(2)(A) due by 3/17/2008, Initial expert reports to be exchanged 4/14/2008. Rebuttal experts reports shall be exchanged on 5/5/2008, Expert disposition taken from 5/5/2008 - 6/16/2008. Summary Judgment Motions due by 8/11/2008; responses due 60 days. Responses due 30 days of service of the motion. Pretrial Conference set for 9/24/2007 03:00 PM before Judge John E. Sprizzo. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 5/17/2007) (jar) (Entered: 05/24/2007)

May 23, 2007

May 23, 2007

PACER
51

AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER REGARDING COORDINATION AND SCHEDULING: Motions for Summary Judgment due by 10/13/2008. Pretrial Conference set for 11/27/2007 at 03:00 PM before Judge John E. Sprizzo. All other deadlines are set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 7/20/07) (kco) (Entered: 07/26/2007)

July 25, 2007

July 25, 2007

PACER
52

AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER REGARDING COORDINATION AND SCHEDULING: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned actions pending in this Court are hereby coordinated for all pre-trial purposes before this Court and as further set forth in this Order. Motions for Summary Judgment due by 12/15/2008. If parties wish to file motions they shall request a pre-motion conference prior to any filings. Oppositions to Motions for Summary Judgment shall be filed within 30 days of service of the motion for summary judgment. Merits Discovery due by 9/15/2008. Production of Documents deadline due by 11/26/07. Expert Depositions shall be taken from Monday, 9/8/08 through Monday, 10/20/08. Defendant's Opposition to any Motion for Class Certification shall be filed 60 days after the motion for class certification has been filed. Plaintiffs' Reply in support of Class Certification shall be filed 30 days after the Opposition is filed. All conference previously scheduled in the Coordinated Actions are hereby adjourned. The Pretrial Conference shall take place on Tues., Nov. 18, 2008. (Signed by Judge Kevin Thomas Duffy on 9/28/07)- Part I (tro) (Entered: 10/02/2007)

Oct. 2, 2007

Oct. 2, 2007

PACER
53

AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER REGARDING COORDINATION AND SCHEDULING: The production of documents requests served shall be completed by 1/28/2008. Merit discovery due 11/17/2008. Disclosure of expert witnesses shall be exchanged on 9/22/2008. Initial expert reports shall be exchanged on 10/20/2008. Rebuttal expert reports due 11/10/2008. Expert depositions to be taken from 11/10/2008 through 12/22/2008. Motions for summary judgment due by 2/16/2009. Oppositions to Motion for summary judgment due within 30 days of service of the motion. Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification due 30 days after the Courts decision with respect to summary judgment. Defendant's Opposition to Motion for Class Certification due 60 days after the motion for class certification, Plaintiffs' reply in support of Class Certification due 30 days after the Opposition is filed. The pretrial conference shall take place on 11/18/2008 for the purpose of informing the Court of the status of the case. However, the parties must, in addition, contact the Court to schedule a pre-motion conference before filing any motion. (Signed by Judge Peter K. Leisure for Judge John E. Sprizzo on 11/19/2007) (jar) (Entered: 11/21/2007)

Nov. 21, 2007

Nov. 21, 2007

PACER
54

AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER REGARDING COORDINATION AND SCHEDULING ( Expert Witness List due by 11/24/2008. Discovery due by 1/20/2009. Motions due by 4/16/2009.) Defendant's Opposition to any Motion for Class Certification shall be 60 days after the motion for class certification shall be filed 60 days after the motion for class certification has been filed. Plaintiffs' Reply in support of Class Certification shall be filed 30 days after the Opposition is filed. All conferences previously scheduled in the Coordinated Actions are hereby adjourned. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 1/29/08) (js) (Entered: 01/30/2008)

Jan. 29, 2008

Jan. 29, 2008

PACER
55

MOTION to Approve /Notice of Motion for Preliminary Settlement Approval. Document filed by Paul Dickson, Joseph Goulden, The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman.(Boni, Michael) (Entered: 10/28/2008)

Oct. 28, 2008

Oct. 28, 2008

RECAP
56

DECLARATION of Michael J. Boni and Exhibits in Support re: 55 MOTION to Approve /Notice of Motion for Preliminary Settlement Approval.. Document filed by Paul Dickson, Joseph Goulden, The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. (Boni, Michael) (Entered: 10/28/2008)

Oct. 28, 2008

Oct. 28, 2008

PACER
57

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 55 MOTION to Approve /Notice of Motion for Preliminary Settlement Approval.. Document filed by Paul Dickson, Joseph Goulden, The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. (Boni, Michael) (Entered: 10/28/2008)

Oct. 28, 2008

Oct. 28, 2008

RECAP
60

MOTION for Daralyn J. Durie to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by Google Inc.(dle) (Entered: 11/03/2008)

Oct. 29, 2008

Oct. 29, 2008

PACER
61

MOTION for David J. Silbert to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by Google Inc.(dle) (Entered: 11/03/2008)

Oct. 29, 2008

Oct. 29, 2008

PACER
62

MOTION for Joseph C. Gratz to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by Google Inc.(dle) (Entered: 11/03/2008)

Oct. 29, 2008

Oct. 29, 2008

PACER
63

MOTION for Melissa J. Miksch to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by Google Inc.(dle) (Entered: 11/03/2008)

Oct. 29, 2008

Oct. 29, 2008

PACER
58

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS; that pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties to the above-captioned case and to The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., et al. v. Google Inc., No. 05 CY 8881, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby agree that plaintiffs may. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 10/29/08) (pl) (Entered: 10/30/2008)

Oct. 30, 2008

Oct. 30, 2008

PACER
59

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT amending 36 Amended Complaint, against Google Inc. Document filed by Association of American Publishers, Inc., Associational Plaintiffs, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Pearson Education, Inc., Simon & Schuster, Inc., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Paul Dickson, Joseph Goulden, The Author's Guild, Herbert Mitgang, Betty Miles, Daniel Hoffman. Related document: 36 Amended Complaint, filed by The Author's Guild, Betty Miles, Joseph Goulden, Paul Dickson, Herbert Mitgang, Daniel Hoffman.(dle) (Entered: 11/03/2008)

Oct. 31, 2008

Oct. 31, 2008

RECAP
64

ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY SETTLEMENT APPROVAL: Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: The motion is GRANTED. The Settlement Agreement is hereby preliminarily approved. Unless otherwise specified, all defined terms herein shall have the same meaning as in the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Class set forth within and two Sub-Classes are provisionally certified for settlement purposes only. A final settlement/fairness hearing shall be held on June 11, 2009, at 1:00 p.m., before the undersigned in Courtroom 14C, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007. The Notice Commencement Date shall be January 5, 2009. The Opt-Out Deadline shall be May 5, 2009.. (Signed by Judge John E. Sprizzo on 11/14/2008) (jfe) (Entered: 11/17/2008)

Nov. 17, 2008

Nov. 17, 2008

RECAP

Set/Reset Hearings: Settlement Conference set for 6/11/2009 at 01:00 PM in Courtroom 14C, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge John E. Sprizzo. (jfe)

Nov. 17, 2008

Nov. 17, 2008

PACER

CASHIERS OFFICE REMARK on 63 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 60 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 62 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 61 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice in the amount of $100.00, paid on 10/31/2008, Receipt Number 667652. (jd)

Nov. 19, 2008

Nov. 19, 2008

PACER
65

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition //JOINT OPPOSITION by Plaintiffs and Defendant to Claudia Pearson's Motion Requesting Change of Date for Final Fairness Hearing (N.B.: Motion has not yet been filed in the ECF System). Document filed by Association of American Publishers, Inc., The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Pearson Education, Inc., Simon & Schuster, Inc., John Wiley & Sons, Inc.. (Keller, Bruce) (Entered: 12/04/2008)

Dec. 4, 2008

Dec. 4, 2008

RECAP
66

ORDER It is hereby ordered that Claudia Pearsons motion shall be and hereby is denied; and it is further ordered that the Fairness Hearing shall occur on June 11, 2009 at 1:00 p.m. in Courtroom 14C, 500 pearl Street. (Signed by Judge Peter K. Leisure for John E. Sprizzo on 12/9/08) (mme) (Entered: 12/10/2008)

Dec. 10, 2008

Dec. 10, 2008

PACER
67

MOTION to Approve Claim Forms / Notice of Motion on Consent for Approval of Claim Forms. Document filed by Association of American Publishers, Inc., The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Pearson Education, Inc., Simon & Schuster, Inc., John Wiley & Sons, Inc..(Keller, Bruce) (Entered: 12/18/2008)

Dec. 18, 2008

Dec. 18, 2008

PACER
68

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 67 MOTION to Approve Claim Forms / Notice of Motion on Consent for Approval of Claim Forms. / Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion on Consent for Approval of Claim Forms. Document filed by Association of American Publishers, Inc., The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Pearson Education, Inc., Simon & Schuster, Inc., John Wiley & Sons, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Part 2 of 4, # 2 Part 3 of 4, # 3 Part 4 of 4)(Keller, Bruce) (Entered: 12/18/2008)

2 Part 2 of 4

View on PACER

3 Part 3 of 4

View on PACER

4 Part 4 of 4

View on PACER

Dec. 18, 2008

Dec. 18, 2008

PACER
69

ORDER APPROVING CLAIM FORMS: granting 67 Motion to Approve Claims Forms. The Motion is GRANTED. The Court approves as to forms attached to the to the Motions as Exhibits B and C, respectively. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 12/23/2008) (tve) (Entered: 12/23/2008)

Dec. 23, 2008

Dec. 23, 2008

RECAP
70

NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT to Judge Denny Chin. Judge John E. Sprizzo is no longer assigned to the case. (mbe) (mbe). (Entered: 01/09/2009)

Jan. 8, 2009

Jan. 8, 2009

RECAP
71

NOTICE of Substitution of Attorney. Old Attorney: Asim Bhansali, New Attorney: Daralyn J. Durie, Address: Durie Tangri Lemley Roberts & Kent LLP, 332 Pine Street, Suite 200, San Francisco, CA, USA 94104, 415-362-6666. Document filed by Google Inc.. (Gratz, Joseph) (Entered: 02/02/2009)

Feb. 2, 2009

Feb. 2, 2009

PACER
72

NOTICE of Opt-Out of proposed settlement agreement to this case, in both the author and the publisher sub-class. Filed by Joe Landwehr, author and publisher (DBA Ancient Tower Press). (djc) (Entered: 03/23/2009)

March 20, 2009

March 20, 2009

PACER
73

MEMO ENDORSEMENT: So ordered on: 71 Notice of Substitution of Attorney, filed by Google Inc. (Signed by Judge Denny Chin on 3/24/09) (cd) (Entered: 03/24/2009)

March 24, 2009

March 24, 2009

PACER
81

Objection to Proposed Settlement. (filed by Robert M. Kunstadt). (djc) (Entered: 04/14/2009)

March 30, 2009

March 30, 2009

PACER
74

OBJECTION TO PROPOSED SETTLEMENT: Google pursued its copying project in calculated disregard of authors' rights. Its business plan was: "So, sue me". To approve the proposed settlement would vindicate Google's street ethics: that the law is whatever you can grab and get away with. Google's added twist -- its update on the Dickensian street pickpocket -- is that if you take very little from very many people, with a technological efficiency unimaginable to Fagan and outsourced at a low cost that he would have envied, you have some real money. Google's case should be referred to the U.S. Attorney for prosecution. Equal Justice demands no less. Filed by Robert M. Kunstadt (jpo) (Entered: 03/31/2009)

March 31, 2009

March 31, 2009

RECAP
75

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Denny Chin from Daniel Kornstein dated 3/27/09 re: Request that the Institute file its brief by 5/5/09. ENDORSEMENT: Approved. ( Brief due by 5/5/2009.) (Signed by Judge Denny Chin on 4/1/09) (cd) (Entered: 04/01/2009)

April 1, 2009

April 1, 2009

PACER
76

MOTION for Joseph C. Gratz to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by Google Inc.(dle) (Entered: 04/09/2009)

April 8, 2009

April 8, 2009

PACER
77

MOTION for Daralyn J. Durie to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Document filed by Google Inc.(dle) (Entered: 04/09/2009)

April 8, 2009

April 8, 2009

PACER
78

LETTER addressed to Office of the Clerk, J. Michael McMahon from Dr. Erik H. Fournier dated 3/21/2009 re: Requesting the reimbursement of necessary attorney costs by Google Inc., Defendant, from cause of the authors copyright perception in this procedure in accordance with F.R.C.P. Rule 54 (b) (1) and (2). (jpo) (Entered: 04/09/2009)

April 9, 2009

April 9, 2009

PACER
79

ORDER FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE: granting 60 Motion for Daralyn J. Duri to Appear Pro Hac Vice. (Signed by Judge Denny Chin on 4/14/2009) (jfe) (jfe). (Entered: 04/14/2009)

April 10, 2009

April 10, 2009

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: New York

Case Type(s):

Disability Rights

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 20, 2005

Closing Date: Feb. 17, 2015

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

The Authors Guild and other national and international organizations claiming to represent the interests of authors and publishers, alleging that the defendant Google violated the Copyright Act by scanning and making available millions of copyrighted works. The case is listed in the Clearinghouse because the proposed settlement would make many of these works available to blind and visually impaired users.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Mooted before ruling

Defendants

Google, Inc. (Mountain View), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Litigation

None

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Issues

General:

Screen readers and similar accessibility devices

Website

Discrimination-basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)

Disability:

Visual impairment