ABSTRACT
Google acquired these books through major libraries but never received permission from the individual authors and rights holders. The court found that Google's snippet search function was transformative because it expanded public knowledge by making certain useful information about these books available online while also ensuring that these snippets provide the public with a substitute for the books themselves. Pointing to Google's commercial profit motive also do the plaintiffs much good, as the court concluded that a mere profit motive is sufficient to overcome Google's transformative purpose. However, access to a snippet is unlikely to satisfy the searcher's interest in the protected elements of an author's work, and the snippet certainly provide a substitute for the book. Turning to the issue of commercial harm in the fourth fair use factor, the court conceded that the snippet function may lead to some loss of sales.
