Google Inc.’s project to digitally copy millions of books for online searches doesn’t violate copyright law, a federal judge ruled, dismissing an eight-year- old lawsuit against the largest search-engine company.
Access to cheaper drugs in other countries may be limited by a provision sought by the U.S. in a Pacific trade deal, according to patent specialists who reviewed a document exposed by the WikiLeaks anti-secrecy group.
Google Inc., owner of the world’s largest search engine, tried to persuade a judge that digitally copying millions of books for online searches without authors’ permission is protected by copyright law.
U.S. lawmakers, influenced by companies including Cisco Systems Inc., Eli Lilly & Co. and Qualcomm Inc., are considering the second set of patent-law changes in three years as the courts try to race ahead of Congress.
Google Inc. asked a U.S. court to dismiss a lawsuit by authors over the digitizing of books, saying that the company’s book-scanning program is a fair use of copyrighted material and a benefit to the public and authors.
Turmoil at Barnes & Noble Inc., where Chief Executive Officer William Lynch resigned last week after the company posted an unexpectedly large loss in the quarter ended April 30, has people in the publishing industry worried. “We’re all forced to ask: What would the book discovery environment look like without Barnes & Noble?” writes Rich Fahle, a former Borders executive who runs a marketing agency for authors.