Textbooks & Educational Materials: Cengage Learning, Bedford, Freeman & Worth; Macmillan Learning; and Elsevier Sue Google For Copyright and Trademark Infringement

The lawsuit was filed today in the Southern District of New York.

Claims For Relief

• Count I – Contributory Copyright Infringement (Asserted by the Publishers)
• Count II – Vicarious Copyright Infringement (Asserted by the Publishers)
• Count III – Trademark Infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1)(b) (Asserted by the Trademark Plaintiffs)

From Reuters:

Google was hit with a lawsuit on Wednesday by educational publishers Cengage, Macmillan Learning, McGraw Hill and Elsevier accusing the tech giant of promoting pirate copies of their textbooks.

Case Docket

Complaint
46 pages; PDF. 

From the Introduction

Paragraph 1

1. This lawsuit seeks to address Google’s systemic and pervasive advertising of unauthorized, infringing copies of the Publishers’ textbooks and educational works. For years, Google has knowingly facilitated and reaped profits from the sale of infringing works through pirate websites that Google promotes. The Publishers have reported infringement after infringement to Google, only to have those reports ignored. Google has continued to advertise infringing works while simultaneously restricting ads for authentic educational works—supporting piracy instead of legitimacy. Google’s conduct violates the Copyright Act, the Lanham Act, and New York’s General Business Law, causing immeasurable harm to Plaintiffs. Now, that harm must be remedied.

Paragraphs 3-6

3. The Publishers have long been sending notices of infringement to the agent Google designated to receive such notices. Each notice identifies hundreds or thousands of specific Google ads for infringing works, including the ad URLs, the infringed copyrighted works, and the pirates’ infringing websites to which the ads contain direct links. The Publishers send Google these notices so Google can take action to stop the piracy. Google’s responses to these notices have been a circus of failures. Google has failed to remove thousands of ads for infringing works in a timely manner, or at all, and has continued to do business with known pirates. Google has even threatened to stop reviewing all of the Publishers’ notices for up to six months simply because the Publishers appropriately re-submitted notices for infringing works that Google previously failed to act upon.

4. The Publishers have long been sending notices of infringement to the agent Google designated to receive such notices. Each notice identifies hundreds or thousands of specific Google ads for infringing works, including the ad URLs, the infringed copyrighted works, and the pirates’ infringing websites to which the ads contain direct links. The Publishers send Google these notices so Google can take action to stop the piracy. Google’s responses to these notices have been a circus of failures. Google has failed to remove thousands of ads for infringing works in a timely manner, or at all, and has continued to do business with known pirates. Google has even threatened to stop reviewing all of the Publishers’ notices for up to six months simply because the Publishers appropriately re-submitted notices for infringing works that Google previously failed to act upon.

5. Legally, when Google receives the Publishers’ notices, and thus becomes specifically aware that it is advertising and directing Google users to infringing websites, Google has an obligation to do something about it. Continuing to advertise and profit from known infringing activity and continuing to do business with known repeat infringers violates the law.

6. Publicly, Google claims that it wants to protect intellectual property, touting itself as “a leader in rooting out and ejecting rogue sites” from its advertising services. But Google’s actions do not match its words. Not only has Google failed to independently “root out and eject” repeat infringer pirates, it has disregarded the infringement notices clearly identifying these “rogue sites.” Plaintiffs have tried repeatedly to discuss these issues with Google, but Google refuses to take basic steps to resolve them. Thus, despite Plaintiffs’ efforts, Google’s site remains littered with ads for infringing works.

Paragraphs 7-10

7. Making matters worse, by using unauthorized images of the Publishers’ textbooks, which often contain registered trademarks, Google misleads consumers into believing they are getting a legitimate product at a bargain price, when they are in fact buying an illicit product. Thus, in addition to its copyright violations, Google’s ads practices violate the Lanham Act. 9.

8. Moreover, Google refuses to allow legitimate sellers like the Publishers to advertise standalone digital books on Google’s Shopping platform, but allows such ads from pirate sellers. As a result, the textbook market is upside down, as the worlds’ largest online advertising business advertises ebooks for pirates but rejects ebook ads for legitimate sellers. Google’s practices harm consumers, who are directed to illegal, inferior products. Google’s practice likewise harms the Publishers, whose sales decrease, while the pirates’ sales increase. This deceptive trade practice violates New York law.

9. Moreover, Google refuses to allow legitimate sellers like the Publishers to advertise standalone digital books on Google’s Shopping platform, but allows such ads from pirate sellers. As a result, the textbook market is upside down, as the worlds’ largest online advertising business advertises ebooks for pirates but rejects ebook ads for legitimate sellers. Google’s practices harm consumers, who are directed to illegal, inferior products. Google’s practice likewise harms the Publishers, whose sales decrease, while the pirates’ sales increase. This deceptive trade practice violates New York law.

10. Without court intervention, Google will continue willfully infringing the Publishers’ copyrights and the Trademark Plaintiffs’ trademarks and violating New York law. To address and remedy Google’s persistent and harmful course of conduct, Plaintiffs bring this action.

Media Coverage

• Google Sued By Top Textbook Publishers Over Ads For Pirated E-Books (via Reuters)

Google representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit. The publishers’ attorney Matt Oppenheim of Oppenheim + Zebrak told Reuters that Google had become a “thieves’ den” for textbook pirates.

Resources

Read the Complete Complaint
46 pages; PDF.

Direct to Case Docket

Filed under: Companies (Publishers/Vendors), Elsevier, Gale, News, Patrons and Users, Reports