text:  For other existing and past examples, one might look to the work of Europeana, https:// 
  
  41 
  www.europeana.eu/en, as well as the mountain of commentary on the failed class action settlement 
  between Google, the Authors Guild, and the Association of American Publishers — see e.g. the excellent 
  collection of court ﬁlings created by James Grimmelmann and colleagues (now archived at the Internet 
  Archive) — https://web.archive.org/web/20140425012526/http://thepublicindex.org/. The Settlement 
  expressly would have set up a “Research Corpus” for non-consumptive research. HathiTrust created a 
  Research Center, with the intention of becoming one of the hosts for the “Research Corpus.” The 
  Settlement was criticized and was ultimately rejected by the district court for both substantive reasons 
  (that is, what the settlement would speciﬁcally do) and procedural (in the sense of violating class-action 
  law, but also in a broader sense of representing a “backroom deal” without suﬃcient participation from 
  impacted interests). The Research Corpus was not a core locus of critique, though it did receive concern 
  in terms of providing too much control to Google, for example. Our purpose in mentioning this is not to 
  relitigate the issue, but rather to call out that design decisions of this sort have been considered in the 
  past. 