PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteRecord labels’ proposed expansion of their copyright lawsuit over the Internet Archive’s Great 78 Project raised a central question for sound archivists: can digitizing old records preserve historical evidence that commercial streaming does not? In March 2025, sound historian David Seubert predicted the labels would regret the case “from a historical perspective.” The suit later settled confidentially and was dismissed, but no public ruling resolved whether the project was fair use.
What the labels sought in the Great 78 Project lawsuit
In March 2025, record labels sought permission to amend their copyright case against the Internet Archive (IA), adding 493 recordings. If accepted, the proposed complaint would have covered 4,624 recordings and sought potential damages of nearly $700 million, according to Ars Technica’s March 2025 report. These were figures describing the plaintiffs’ proposed case, not a court’s findings or an award.
The labels argued that the Great 78 Project infringed copyright and that online access competed with commercial streaming. They also disputed that the project was a legitimate educational archive and said the recordings could be found through other services. IA maintained that its project was fair use. Those positions were contested; the proposed amendment did not establish infringement.
What the Great 78 Project preserves
The Great 78 Project aims to digitize 78 rpm recordings. Ars Technica described the project in March 2025 as an effort covering about 3 million three-minute recordings, with roughly 400,000 recordings then on its website. Those are article-era figures, not verified current totals.
#1 Best Overall
Archivists’ case for preserving the discs extends beyond their sound. A physical record can contain evidence in its label, catalog number, printing, and other details that may help researchers identify and contextualize a recording. Digitizing the audio alone does not necessarily capture all that physical information.
Archivists also distinguish an archive’s long-term preservation role from a streaming service’s catalog. Nathan Georgitis, executive director of the Association for Recorded Sound Collections, told Ars Technica: “That ‘over time’ part is really the key function, I think, that distinguishes an archive from maybe a streaming service in a way.” Archivists also noted that some recordings may not be commercially available for re-release. These are arguments about the value of preservation and access, not a finding about every recording in the case.
Rank #2
Why the sides disagreed about access
| Issue | Archivists’ perspective | Labels’ position as reported |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose of online access | Preservation and research access can serve a public and historical purpose. | The labels argued that the project’s online access infringed their copyrights and compared it with commercial streaming. |
| Availability elsewhere | Some works may not be commercially available for re-release, and availability can change over time. | The labels said recordings were available through other services. |
| What a record can document | The physical disc’s label, catalog number, printing, and other features can provide research evidence in addition to audio. | The labels disputed that the project qualified as a legitimate educational archive. |
| Legal question | IA maintained that the project was fair use. | The labels asserted copyright infringement. |
The comparison captures the parties’ arguments as described in the March 2025 report. It does not show that a judge accepted either side’s account of the project or its legal status.
How the lawsuit ended
The case later settled confidentially and was dismissed with prejudice on October 16, 2025, according to Ars Technica’s settlement report and the Copyright Alliance’s case summary. The Internet Archive had announced the settlement on September 15, 2025, in a statement on its blog.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
The settlement terms were not publicly disclosed in those accounts. The dismissal ended the case, but a confidential settlement is not a judicial decision on the fair-use merits. The sources do not establish that a court ruled the Great 78 Project lawful or infringing.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What Seubert meant by “regret”
Seubert, sound collections manager at the University of California, Santa Barbara library, predicted that the labels would regret the case “from a historical perspective,” because he regards the Internet Archive as valuable. That was his forecast about historical consequences—not evidence that record labels later expressed regret. Georgitis also argued that copyright law can protect rights while allowing use: “It is possible to change and develop copyright law to both protect copyright and to allow use.”
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
