Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google Inc. (2015)
2d Cir.
2015
804 F.3d 202
Copyright / Fair Use
~6 min read
LOCATION: India
AUTHOR_NAME: Gulzar Hashmi •
PUBLISH_DATE: 2025-11-01 •
PRIMARY_KEYWORDS: Authors Guild v. Google, fair use, transformative use, snippets •
SECONDARY_KEYWORDS: Google Books, mass digitization, search indexing, Second Circuit, 804 F.3d 202
Quick Summary
Google scanned millions of library books, built a full-text search, and showed small snippets in results. Authors said this was infringement. The Second Circuit said it was fair use because the use was transformative: it helped users find information about books without offering a substitute for the books.
Holding: Mass digitization for search + limited snippet display = fair use.
Issues
- Is scanning whole books to create a search index and show snippets a fair use?
- Does giving digital copies to library partners make Google liable for contributory infringement?
- How do amount used and market effect work when the purpose is search?
Rules
- Fair Use Factors: purpose/character (including transformative use), nature of work, amount/substantiality, and market effect.
- Transformative Use: Using text to enable search and discovery is a new purpose that does not replace the book.
- Whole-work copying can be fair if needed for the transformative goal, and public display remains limited (snippets, security).
- Contributory liability needs more than speculation that libraries might allow infringing uses.
Key Point: A search index that reveals information about books, not the books themselves, supports fair use.
Facts (Timeline)
Partnership
Google worked with major research libraries to scan their collections.Index & Snippets
Google created a searchable index and showed small text snippets in results.Copies
Digital files were stored on Google servers and shared with library partners for non-infringing uses.Suit
Authors Guild and others sued, claiming unauthorized copying and display.District Court
The SDNY held the program was fair use. Plaintiffs appealed.Appeal (2d Cir. 2015)
The Second Circuit affirmed fair use (804 F.3d 202).Arguments
Appellants (Authors)
- Scanning whole books is verbatim copying without consent.
- Snippets reveal protected text and risk market substitution.
- Sharing files with libraries risks infringing re-use.
Respondent (Google)
- Purpose is transformative: search and discovery, not reading.
- Public display is limited to snippets with safeguards.
- Library copies are for non-infringing uses; fears of misuse are speculative.
Judgment
Affirmed. The Second Circuit held that digitization + search + snippet display are fair use.
- Purpose & character: Highly transformative; augments public knowledge.
- Amount used: Whole-work copying was necessary to enable full-text search; public display stayed limited.
- Market effect: No meaningful substitute for the books; no proven harm to markets.
- Libraries: Providing copies for non-infringing uses is permissible; speculative misuse does not impose liability.
Ratio Decidendi
Using full copies to power search that reveals only information about text—not the text itself—serves a new purpose. Because the display is limited and markets are not displaced, the use qualifies as fair.
Why It Matters
- Confirms that information-finding tools can be fair use.
- Shows courts accept whole-work copying when needed for a transformative function.
- Supports library–tech partnerships that increase public access while protecting rights.
Key Takeaways
Transformative Search
Scanning for full-text index is a new purpose different from reading.
Controlled Display
Only snippets appear; users cannot reconstruct the book.
Market Integrity
No substantial market substitution shown.
Library Copies
Permissible for non-infringing uses; fears of misuse are speculative.
Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook
Mnemonic: “SCAN & FIND” — SCAN whole texts to FIND facts, not to read books.
- Ask Purpose: Is it search/discovery or reading?
- Check Display: Only snippets with safeguards?
- Test Market: Any real substitute effect?
IRAC Outline
| Issue | Rule | Application | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is Google’s scanning + index + snippets fair use? | Four-factor fair use test; focus on transformative purpose and market effect. | New purpose (search), limited display (snippets), security measures, no proven market harm. | Yes. Fair use; district court affirmed. |
Glossary
- Transformative Use
- A new purpose or character that changes how the work is used, like enabling search.
- Snippet
- A small piece of text shown in results that does not replace the book.
- Contributory Infringement
- Liability for others’ infringement; needs more than a speculative risk.
FAQs
That Google’s digitization, search index, and snippet display are fair use.
No. Whole-work copying was needed to make full-text search work; public access stayed limited.
Snippets show only tiny parts and cannot replace reading or buying the book.
The court accepted non-infringing library uses and rejected liability based on speculative misuse.
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now