Judge Orders Anna’s Archive to Delete WorldCat Data — But Compliance Looks Unlikely

Federal court orders Anna’s Archive to purge WorldCat data

A federal judge has granted a default judgment in favor of OCLC, the nonprofit that runs the WorldCat global library catalog, and ordered shadow library Anna’s Archive to delete all copies of WorldCat data and stop scraping, storing, using, or distributing the catalog's contents. The ruling stems from OCLC’s allegation that Anna’s Archive illegally accessed WorldCat.org to obtain roughly 2.2TB of catalog metadata.

What the court said and what it means

The judgment requires Anna’s Archive to permanently delete any copies of the WorldCat dataset it obtained and to cease any further scraping or distribution of that dataset. Because the court entered a default judgment — a ruling when a defendant fails to contest a claim — the order reflects the judge’s acceptance of OCLC’s allegations without a contested trial.

In practical terms the order gives OCLC a clear legal win and a court-backed injunction it can use to press third parties — hosting providers, registrars, and other intermediaries — to cut off services that facilitate the archive's distribution of WorldCat data.

Anna’s Archive: a brief profile

Launched in 2022, Anna’s Archive bills itself as a shadow library and a search engine for other shadow libraries. It aggregates and indexes large collections of books and other written materials and makes files available via torrent indexes and mirrored sites. In recent months the project has expanded its scraping ambitions beyond books: investigators and reporting revealed that Anna’s Archive scraped Spotify to assemble a roughly 300TB copy of most-streamed songs.

The site lost its .org domain a few weeks ago but remains reachable via other domains and mirrors, a common tactic among shadow libraries to evade court-ordered takedowns.

Why many doubt the order will be fully effective

Despite the clear legal victory for OCLC, commentators and technical experts are skeptical the court order will meaningfully remove the data from the internet. There are several reasons for that skepticism:

• Decentralized distribution: Anna’s Archive distributes materials via torrents and mirrored domains. Once a dataset is seeded on bittorrent networks or archived by independent mirrors, complete removal is technically and practically difficult.
• Domain hopping and mirrors: Shadow libraries routinely switch domains and use multiple hosting providers, registrars, and content delivery mechanisms to stay online. A single court order often cannot reach every mirror or anonymous host.
• Jurisdictional limits: US court orders carry weight domestically and with cooperative third parties, but enforcement against operators and infrastructure outside those jurisdictions is slow and uncertain.
• Default judgment dynamics: Because the decision came by default, it did not resolve the underlying factual disputes in a contested hearing. Plaintiffs get an order, but defendants who ignore courts remain able to operate from the shadows.

Broader stakes: metadata, libraries, and shadow networks

WorldCat is an important shared catalog used by libraries worldwide to discover and share bibliographic information. OCLC and member libraries argue that uncontrolled scraping and republication of their catalog undermines library operations and may expose privacy-sensitive metadata. For Anna’s Archive and similar projects, publicly accessible catalog data is a navigation layer that helps users locate and obtain files from shadow repositories.

The dispute sits at the intersection of library practice, data governance, copyright enforcement, and internet-scale content distribution. It raises questions about how far civil litigation can reach to protect metadata assets and whether technical containment is feasible once material proliferates across torrents and international mirrors.

What could happen next

OCLC now has a court order it can use to pressure upstream infrastructure providers and to pursue enforcement actions if it can identify operators or hosting partners. If Anna’s Archive continues to ignore the order, OCLC could seek additional remedies such as motions for contempt, targeted takedowns through registrars and hosting providers, and cooperation from platforms that index or seed the material.

Still, observers expect a tug-of-war: plaintiff wins on paper, while shadow networks exploit decentralization, anonymity, and cross-border hosting to remain accessible. The case is likely to be one more example of the limits of traditional litigation in stopping distributed repositories that are designed to resist takedown.

Why the ruling matters

The decision is notable for libraries and information professionals because it affirms that a major library consortium can use federal courts to protect the integrity of its catalog data. At the same time, the ruling highlights the friction between legal authority and the technical realities of persistent, distributed online archives. For policymakers, it underscores the need to think about infrastructure-level approaches to enforcement, and for researchers and readers it is a reminder that access to information increasingly depends on contested technical and legal battles.

Bottom line: OCLC scored a decisive legal order compelling Anna’s Archive to expunge WorldCat data and stop scraping it. Whether the order will translate into complete removal from the internet is another matter — and for now, most experts expect the archive and its mirrors to keep finding ways to stay online.