Amicus brief written by the Library
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2025 3:51 am
Statement
My organization, the EveryLibrary Institute, is a public policy and tax policy research organization focusing on issues affecting the future of libraries in the United States and abroad.
Alongside our colleagues at ReadersFirst, we joined an Futures Institute, to ask the court to uphold a library digital loaning practice known as Controlled Digital Lending – or “CDL”. CDL uses technology to enable a library to acquire, preserve, and provide access to digital versions books for library patrons.
Simply put, CDL is a different way of utilizing the centuries-old method by which libraries have loaned the books on their shelves for the public to read.
Controlled Digital Lending – as is commonly used in libraries like the Internet Archive – does not replace ebook licenses, and is a reasonable practice for the current moment. For more than a century, Copyright phone number library law has allowed libraries to legally lend books and other materials they own. This practice of library lending is essential in ensuring public access to information, particularly books – and has numerous social benefits. With the growth of digital delivery, libraries have adapted by lending materials using new technologies and formats.
However, this lawsuit seeks to outlaw digital library lending unless they dictate how, where, to whom, and at what price it occurs. This would significantly alter how libraries work and their relationships with their patrons and collections in the digital age.
I’d like to take a moment to remind the court about the context of the “Emergency Lending Library” and to ask it to consider the context under which the Internet Archive, as a library, was responding to need. From the launch of the Emergency Lending Library on March 24, 2020 to June 16, 2020, essentially every school district in the United States was closed to in-person learning.
My organization, the EveryLibrary Institute, is a public policy and tax policy research organization focusing on issues affecting the future of libraries in the United States and abroad.
Alongside our colleagues at ReadersFirst, we joined an Futures Institute, to ask the court to uphold a library digital loaning practice known as Controlled Digital Lending – or “CDL”. CDL uses technology to enable a library to acquire, preserve, and provide access to digital versions books for library patrons.
Simply put, CDL is a different way of utilizing the centuries-old method by which libraries have loaned the books on their shelves for the public to read.
Controlled Digital Lending – as is commonly used in libraries like the Internet Archive – does not replace ebook licenses, and is a reasonable practice for the current moment. For more than a century, Copyright phone number library law has allowed libraries to legally lend books and other materials they own. This practice of library lending is essential in ensuring public access to information, particularly books – and has numerous social benefits. With the growth of digital delivery, libraries have adapted by lending materials using new technologies and formats.
However, this lawsuit seeks to outlaw digital library lending unless they dictate how, where, to whom, and at what price it occurs. This would significantly alter how libraries work and their relationships with their patrons and collections in the digital age.
I’d like to take a moment to remind the court about the context of the “Emergency Lending Library” and to ask it to consider the context under which the Internet Archive, as a library, was responding to need. From the launch of the Emergency Lending Library on March 24, 2020 to June 16, 2020, essentially every school district in the United States was closed to in-person learning.