The Elephantine Google Books Settlement

@article{Grimmelmann2011TheEG,
  title={The Elephantine Google Books Settlement},
  author={James Grimmelmann},
  journal={Young Scholars Law eJournal},
  year={2011}
}
  • James Grimmelmann
  • Published 2011
  • Sociology
  • Young Scholars Law eJournal
  • The genius - some would say the evil genius - of the proposed Google Books settlement was the way it fuses legal categories. The settlement raised important class action, copyright, and antitrust issues, among others. But just as an elephant is not merely a trunk plus legs plus a tail, the settlement was more than the sum of the individual issues it raised. These “issues” were really just different ways of describing a single, overriding issue of law and policy - a new way to concentrate an… CONTINUE READING
    6 Citations

    References

    SHOWING 1-10 OF 11 REFERENCES
    Under Cloak of Settlement
    • 12
    • PDF
    Author Autonomy and Atomism in Copyright Law
    • 12
    • PDF
    Authors Guild, No. 05 CV 8136-DC
    • See Objections of Class Members The American Society of Media Photographers
    • 2009
    But see IIPSJ Letter, supra note 115 (arguing that increased availability of the works themselves furthers the goals of copyright); see also Brief of Amicus Curiae IILP supra note 86
      Professor of Law and Assoc
      • Dir., Inst. of Intellectual Prop. & Social Justice
      See Grimmelmann, supra note 108. waived Noerr-Pennington in Settlement 2.0, but note again the antitrust/ class-action connection
      • See ASA
      See Privacy Authors and Publishers' Objection to Proposed Settlement
      • 2009
      See Statement of Interest, supra note 37
        The Earth Is Not Flat: The Public Interest and the Google Book Settlement: A Reply to Grimmelmann