I'd like to add a few comments to what I wrote earlier. First, would I take legal action against the AOS? No, not worth the effort, even though I find the current administration distasteful. Issues of copyright have NOTHING to do with whether one was paid or not. If someone wanted to publish the "back issues" of this listserv without getting permission of the authors, it would be the same issue. The point I was trying to make is that the AOS, along with any other American organization is bound by the Tasini vs. New York Times decision, which essentially says that selling a digitized version of a print publication creates a NEW publication. This new publication requires separate author permission (and in the case of the NYT, payment for use).

HOWEVER, one can create digital versions of a print publication legally as long as access is limited to current subscribers, who are authenticated for use. For example, the American Public Health Association (of which I'm a member) does this.

The above comments have to do with publications from 1923 to the present. Everything before that is in the public domain. And this is where Google comes in. Wilella, perhaps you didn't notice in all the hoopla about this project that only publications BEFORE 1923 will be digitized (with the possible exception of those which they've received permission to digitize and/or are by law, as in US government publication, in the public domain). The named libraries (NY Public, Oxford, Stanford, Michigan, and Harvard) are all great libraries, but from an orchid perspective are not comprehensive much less exhaustive. I don't know how or if they plan to handle this. The above-named all are closer to science and humanities collections rather than the more "practical" horticulture collections. It's a great starting point, but I hope they go beyond it to include additional special collections (for example, the National Agricultural Library or the great land-grant university libraries such as Cornell and Michigan State).

Wilella, I won't go back to the discussion of fair use that we had earlier except to note that, at least in the US, this is fairly well established. However, this does not allow non-profits or anyone else to conduct wholesale theft of intellectual property. One of the learning pieces I got from the last discussion was how in Singapore, through some combination of American imperialism and local fascism, that this right is much more limited than it is here in the US.

As for why apparently no one has ever made an electronic index to the Bulletin available, I don't know. This would seem to be well within the educational mission of the AOS, and quite appropriate. Since the board initially funded the CD/DVD digitization project, I would be interested in knowing why it apparently was abandoned. Perhaps they actually had their lawyers look at it and decided that it was too much trouble to try to get the necessary permissions. Since it was intended to be profit-making, perhaps they decided that there wasn't enough of a market for it (although, given the relatively low cost of doing so, I tend to doubt this). Perhaps the most likely scenario is that one or more influential photographers stopped it. Photos, of course, are also copyrighted. Unlike most authors for the journal, one or more of these photographers do make their living from selling their photos and would not favor making them digitally available "for free." I understood that there were technical means to protect their interests, so I don't know.

As for how to create the demand for the product in some form, it's hard to say. Although it claims to be a membership organization, the AOS (unlike most professional organizations I am familiar with) has no real accountability to the members, and some would say limited interest in what they have to say. While there is a semi-annual so-called "members meeting" (formerly trustees meeting), I am not aware that the organization does indeed at that meeting have any time when the members can talk to the management. I suppose if people took time to write to the president and/or the Executive Director, it might have some effect. Good luck.

At this point in time, I think the most useful and logical thing to do would be to digitize all of the back content and make it available for members on the AOS website much as other organizations have done (including, I believe some orchid ones such as the Pleurothallid Alliance). There would be no new money in this for the AOS, but it would be an excellent service to members and subscribers, including library subscribers (I'm thinking here of university students).

Sincerely,
Harvey Brenneise
in a wet Seattle





_______________________________________________ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com

Reply via email to