We're finally nearing the end of this saga. Yesterday, Publishers Weekly reported that Macmillan has finalized their e-book settlement with the state and consumer classes. The agreement has been sent to Judge Cote, who is expected to approve it. The final total for Macmillan was $26 million, $20 million of which is earmarked for consumer compensation. The payout is expected by summer. I'm hoping that's also a date for the settlement money due from the other publishers. Last year, I read that Judge Cote would be reviewing the other settlements in February. I haven't heard anything about that ruling, and I assume she's...

Numerous websites have been reporting on the latest twist in the ReDigi case (for example, here on Paid Content). The case sets an important potential precedent for other business plans involving the sale of digital content. I know Amazon has contemplated a move into this area, and I wonder if they might be the ones with the deep pockets, not to mention the legal might, to try and fight this one. The ruling was interesting in that, from what I've read, it didn't oppose the sale of digital media in principle. Rather, it opposed the 'first-sale doctrine' defense that ReDigi was using...

As e-books emerge as more and more of a popular medium, politicians have to look at new ways of protecting citizens. When many laws were enacted, even decades ago, they were written without much consideration for future digital endeavors. Arizona is the most recent to state to look at e-books, and to move to protect those that read them. A bill is going through the state legislature to add e-books to the current library privacy law, according to the Associated Press. The current state law already prohibits the disclosure of library records without a court order. This bill would protect readers of...

By now you've likely heard that the Supreme Court has ruled, in a 6-3 decision, in favor of immigrant scientist Supap Kirtsaeng in Kirtsaeng V. Wiley. In what's being heralded as a win for consumers and libraries, and a loss for publishers, the SCOTUS overturned a previous ruling against Kirtsaeng, who had been buying textbooks printed (legally) abroad—where they cost significantly less than they do in, say, the United States—and then reselling them in the U.S. on eBay and turning a handsome profit in the process. In a statement yesterday, Wiley's President & CEO Stephen M. Smith wrote: "We are disappointed that the U.S. Supreme Court has decided...

According to the Huffington Post, three independent bookstores are filing a class action suit against Amazon and the "Big Six" publishers. Alyson Decker of Blecher & Collins PC, lead counsel acting for the bookstores, described DRM as "a problem that affects many independent bookstores." She said the complaint is still in the process of being served to Amazon and the publishers, and declined to state how it came about, or whether other bookstores had been approached to be party to the suit. "We are seeking relief for independent brick-and-mortar bookstores so that they would be able to sell open-source and DRM-free books that...

One hurdle down. Several more to go with the EU, Canadian Competition Bureau and various other antitrust authorities around the world still needing to weigh in on this. Penguin's settlement with the Justice Department was a move to smooth the way for this merger, and it looks like that move worked. Note that Random House, not included in the price-fixing case, will be bound by the terms of the Penguin settlement. Who owns how much of what? For those who are keeping score, according to the announcement: Following completion, Bertelsmann will own 53% and Pearson 47% of Penguin Random House. It will encompass...

Apple is now the lone hold-out. As you may recall, three publishers—Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Schuster—immediately settled, leaving Penguin, MacMillan and Apple to fight it out in court. Penguin settled in December, probably to protect their pending merger with Random House. And now Macmillan joins its fellows. Macmillan CEO John Sargent cited financial reasons for the settlement, according to this story on Publishers Lunch: "Our company is not large enough to risk a worst case judgment. In this action the government accused five publishers and Apple of conspiring to raise prices. As each publisher settled, the remaining defendants became responsible not only...

Ars Technica has a couple of great, in-depth pieces laying out in detail the facts of the matter surrounding the upcoming Supreme Court case concerning a Thai exchange student who imported and resold cheap foreign editions of English-language textbooks to finance his doctorate. Publishers contend he earned $1.2 million in revenues, and essentially set himself up as an unlicensed importer/distributor, damaging the publishers’ market for the books within the United States. The publisher plaintiff is John Wiley & Sons, which has also garnered attention for its recent lawsuits against unauthorized BitTorrent distributors of its books. The article discusses the Costco vs. Omega case, which I covered...

If you’re interested in any new tidbit of information about the legal matters surrounding the publishers’ and Apple’s implementation of agency pricing, here’s an interesting one for you. Publishers Weekly reports that Denise Cote, the judge in the class-action suit against Apple and the publishers, has ruled that Walter Isaacson, the the author of the Steve Jobs biography, does not have to divulge unpublished notes and interview materials to the law firm serving as the plaintiffs in the case. The law firm wanted to see the notes to pick them over for anything that would lend support to the...

Personanondata has a look at a recent legal decision in Canada’s Supreme Court concerning “fair dealing” (what we call “fair use”) as it applied to music and educational material—similar to the recent Georgia University ruling in the US. One particular point the judge made is that it’s unrealistic to expect universities to purchase entire copies of textbooks to provide to students if they only needed a small portion of the entire work. He also suggested that claims of financial harm from professors photocopying textbooks was spurious, and that many other factors could affect publishers’ income to a greater...

PaidContent has a copy of Google’s motion for summary judgment, and a summary of what it says. Google makes the case that its scanning of all those copyrighted books qualifies as fair use, and cites numerous examples of beneficial outcomes that have come out of the availability of that information to be searched. It also insists that inclusion in the search has been beneficial, not harmful, to sales of the books it has scanned, and even well-known literary agencies like William Morris recognize that. The Authors Guild was expected to file its own motion later today, but I haven’t...

The public may now be developing a love affair with e-books, but they may have lost their romance for some of Harlequin’s authors. Three such authors are suing Harlequin over a matter of miscalculated e-book royalties. Barbara Keiler, Mona Kay Thomas and Linda Barrett allege (PDF) that Harlequin used a tax-purposes subsidiary, Harlequin Swiss, to cheat them out of e-book royalties between 1994 by basing their “50% of receipts” rate on the money Swiss received from Harlequin, rather than the money Harlequin received from selling the books. Authors thus ended up getting between 24 and 32 cents per...