The Authors Guild, Inc. et al v. Hathitrust et al
DECLARATION of Daniele Simpson in Support re: 81 MOTION for Summary Judgment.. Document filed by Authors' Licensing and Collecting Society, Pat Cummings, Erik Grundstrom, Angelo Loukakis, Norsk Faglitteraer Forfatter0OG Oversetterforening, Roxana Robinson, Helge Ronning, Andre Roy, Jack R. Salamanca, James Shapiro, Daniele Simpson, T.J. Stiles, Sveriges Forfattarforbund, The Australian Society Of Authors Limited, The Authors Guild, Inc., The Authors League Fund, Inc, Union Des Ecrivaines Et Des Ecrivains Quebecois, Fay Weldon, the Writers' Union of Canada. (Rosenthal, Edward)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
THE AUTHORS GUILD, INC., et al.,
- against :
HATHITRUST, et al.,
Index No. 11 Civ. 6351 (HB)
DECLARATION OF DANIÈLE SIMPSON
I, Danièle Simpson, hereby declare as follows:
I am one of the plaintiffs in the above-captioned action and submit this
declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.
I am a children’s book author, novelist, short-story writer and poet. I am also the
President of the Plaintiff Union des Écrivaines et des Écrivains Québécois (“UNEQ”).
The Work At Issue
I am the sole author and copyright owner of the collection of poetry Je Cours Plus
Vite Que La Lycose: Poèmes (hereafter “Poèmes”).
Although I have licensed to my publishers certain exclusive rights in connection
with the commercial exploitation of Poèmes, I did so in exchange for the payment of royalties
and I remain the legal and/or beneficial owner of all rights in and to Poèmes. I never assigned to
any third party the copyright to Poèmes.
Unauthorized Uses Of My Work
It has come to my attention that a print copy of Poèmes was copied without my
permission when it was digitized by one the defendant universities (collectively referred to
herein along with HathiTrust as “Defendants”) in partnership with Google, as part of the
HathiTrust and/or Google Books projects. This digitization took place without my knowledge,
consent, or approval. I did not authorize Google, HathiTrust, or any of the university defendants
to digitize or make any other use of Poèmes. To date, I have received no compensation of any
kind for Defendants’ digitization and various uses of Poèmes.
Harm Resulting From Defendants’ Use Of My Work
As an author who depends in large part on the value of my work to earn a living, I
brought this action because the Defendants’ unauthorized digitization and use of Poèmes has
harmed or threatens to harm me in a number of ways.
I have reviewed the Declaration of T.J. Stiles and I agree with and incorporate by
reference Mr. Stiles’ descriptions of the various harm and potential harm caused by the
Defendants’ actions. Two differences between Mr. Stiles and me are that (as described below)
Poèmes is no longer in print and I have not yet chosen to make Poèmes available in digital form.
This difference does not, however, change the fact that Defendants’ actions are causing and
threatening to cause damage to me and to the value of Poèmes.
New technology is opening new possibilities in publishing and it is now possible,
for the first time in history, to self-publish a book in print or digital forms without the aid of a
publishing company. While I have not yet made a decision on how to proceed with Poèmes, I
am aware of this option and consider it a possibility for the future. This is why even my
currently out-of-print work is affected by the Defendants’ unauthorized copying.
I believe that I am entitled to determine whether, when and under what
circumstances Poèmes are scanned, digitized, copied and used. Defendants’ insistence that the
new, complex, technologically-enabled uses they intend to make of Poèmes should be permitted
without my consent dangerously presupposes that copyright law does not give authors any right
to control how their works are used and exploited in these contexts. To the best of my
knowledge, this is not the law in the United States. While my Poèmes is not yet available in
digital form, I reserve the right to license the creation of digital versions of Poèmes if and when I
Defendants argue that uses of Poèmes that do not allow individuals to read the
text, such as non-consumptive research and full-text searching, do not inhibit sales of Poèmes or
deprive me of licensing opportunities and therefore do not require my permission. This is not so.
As the Declaration of T.J. Stiles points out, these kinds of uses represent a new market whose
value is evidenced by Defendants’ use of Poèmes, as well as the works owned by the other
Plaintiffs and the millions of other works Defendants scanned and copied. I believe that I have
the legal right to decide whether or not to permit these uses, and to seek remuneration for these
uses if I do decide to allow them. Defendants could have asked my permission to digitize my
work, but did not do so. 11. In addition, by failing to seek a license, Defendants eliminated the
usual mechanism that authors use to exercise control over our work: licensing or other
am rendered powerless to dictate terms as to how Poèmes may or may not be used. I also have
no ability to insist that HathiTrust take security measures to protect my work. I have no power to
ensure that the infringing copies of my work are truly in a “dark archive” that is not accessible
for viewing or further copying. I have no assurance that Defendants’ actual use of my work is
limited to the uses they claim to intend to make, and no power of enforcement if their uses
exceed this scope.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.