> They decided to loan out digital assets without any regard to the backed licenses available.

No, they loan out a digital copy, protected by DRM, of an asset that they physically own.

The idea that only the publisher could produce an e-book version of a paper book for public distribution protected by DRM, and that the e-book version needs to be licensed, is completely ludicrous.

If they only went after the emergency library then fine—I am curious, and the judge is too, how they would've computed monetary damages, but that was clearly a copyright violation. But shutting down CDL altogether would be a lot darker.

Fun fact, the only time I used the IA to borrow a book I ended up buying it. But it was out of print, so I bought it used and the publisher didn't see a dime. Based on this case I think they wouldn't have deserved it anyway.