The Sigil
Mr. 3000 (Words per post)
The problem is that the law doesn't move at the speed of technology.
Lending libraries grew out of the "Doctrine of First Sale" which basically says once I have legally purchased a copy of a book (or other piece of art), I have the right to dispose of that copy in any way I please (except making additional copies). I could lend it to a friend. I could sell it to someone else. I could tear out all the pages and paste them back into the binding in reverse order. I could used a sharpie to redact every third word.
As I mentioned above, Book Publishers weren't a fan of this because it meant they competed against themselves... a book I publish today competes not just with the books others publish today, but also with the book I published last month.
With physical copies, it was impossible to do away with the "Doctrine of First Sale" but the rise of digital equipment means that every time you arrange bits on the storage area of a device, you have technically created a "new copy" - every time you arrange bits in the RAM area of a device, you have technically created a "new copy" - every time you send instructions to a display to turn LEDs off and on you have created a "new copy."
So publishing companies got their lawyers together and used this quirk of how electronics work to create "License Agreements" based on Copyright Law that was created when books meant "physically printed matter." Rather than update Copyright Law to match technology, lawmakers decided (or were lobbied) to let the publishing companies essentially write their own rules ("License Agreements").
I could keep going but that's the basics. Lending libraries were not "anti-business" when founded and everything was physical. Businesses' goals changed as tech advanced and now libraries are considered anti-business, but I would argue that's more about how business has changed goals than libraries have changed goals.
