Page 1 of 1

These publishers have not shown

Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2025 3:51 am
by aminaas1576
With this lawsuit, publishers have repeated those same claims of massive harm from controlled digital lending.

But this case has revealed one thing very clearly, after both sides have spent nearly three years, and millions of dollars looking at the actual market and usage data.

There has been no harm. the loss of even one dollar.

Even during COVID, when every physical library was closed and the Internet Archive stepped up to provide an Emergency Library.

Contrary to the publishers’ dire predictions there was phone number library simply no effect on their market. Not one dollar of harm.

When asked under oath, their own executives admit this. For example, Alison Lazarus, EVP and Director of Group Sales for Hachette, admitted that their theory of harm is only. Another executive, Skip Dye, SVP of Library Sales and Digital Strategy at Penguin Random House, candidly admitted that when it comes to market harm, quote: “I don’t have any evidence.”

Another agreed, stating: “There’s no factual analysis. It’s just one inference one could make.” That was Chantal Restivo-Alessi, Chief Digital Officer of HarperCollins.

Tellingly, the publishers instructed their own 950 dollar per hour expert not to even try to measure economic harm. They didn’t give him any data to measure. When asked under oath whether any potential sales were lost, he responded: “I don’t have empirical evidence of that.