Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
I'm writing to thank Michael for his ongoing clarification of 108 and work on making the spinner available. I know some on this list may find it hard to believe that (legally speaking) financial interests don't always preclude ethical ones (e.g., preserving our cultural heritage), but these folks shouldn't be too concerned about the imagined deleterious effects of 108. In a few instances when we @ UW Seattle preserved rare and orphaned films, we have had distributors re-use portions of these titles for new for-profit works (and these distributors did their own extensive search for rights holders to be sure they were being compensated). However--and this may upset some of the anti-108 and anti-fair use contingent on this list--in some cases our preservation efforts (again made possible by 108) led to new *non-profit* works such as this student's documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7Px39IXGwE She may not have made any money for distributors making this work, but she ended up placing first for National History Day in the Senior Individual Documentary category. If it wasn't for 108, we wouldn't have been able to provide footage. This next year we are going to ramp up our efforts to preserve/make accessible more of our rare films and videos. While digitizing, we are also going to screen and broadcast the films on the internet (more about this project is available here http://bit.ly/kepuLM). John http://lib.washington.edu/media http://faculty.washington.edu/vallier VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
but would you preserve a work if a copyright holder specifically told you not to? I ask because again because a major figure in library preservation project who also digitizes and streams everything his institution ever bought ( not sure why I won't name him but for the moment I won't) told a librarian at ALA event that the library should make NO EFFORT to contact a rights holder even if they knew exactly who they were and how to find them, because they might interfere with such a preservation. On top of being illegal this is also really stupid. There have been more than a few instances in the world of film preservation where archives failed to check around and different institutions spent a lot of money preserving the same title. Again I am not pulling this stuff out of thin air and I think everyone here knows there are many institutions making illegal copies of feature films as well as streaming them, not because it is the only way to see them, but because it is cheaper than actually paying a rights holder for their work. On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:36 PM, John Vallier vall...@u.washington.eduwrote: I'm writing to thank Michael for his ongoing clarification of 108 and work on making the spinner available. I know some on this list may find it hard to believe that (legally speaking) financial interests don't always preclude ethical ones (e.g., preserving our cultural heritage), but these folks shouldn't be too concerned about the imagined deleterious effects of 108. In a few instances when we @ UW Seattle preserved rare and orphaned films, we have had distributors re-use portions of these titles for new for-profit works (and these distributors did their own extensive search for rights holders to be sure they were being compensated). However--and this may upset some of the anti-108 and anti-fair use contingent on this list--in some cases our preservation efforts (again made possible by 108) led to new *non-profit* works such as this student's documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7Px39IXGwE She may not have made any money for distributors making this work, but she ended up placing first for National History Day in the Senior Individual Documentary category. If it wasn't for 108, we wouldn't have been able to provide footage. This next year we are going to ramp up our efforts to preserve/make accessible more of our rare films and videos. While digitizing, we are also going to screen and broadcast the films on the internet (more about this project is available here http://bit.ly/kepuLM). John http://lib.washington.edu/media http://faculty.washington.edu/vallier VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
I admit I know very little on copyright for written materials, but I find it hard to believe that a library can make a copy of out of print book for someone who then gets to use keep it. I am obviously missing something here. Can you point me to the part where the researcher gets to keep a copy of an out of print but still under copyright written work? One copy per researcher or per book? Can a library make 100 copies of an out of print item for 100 different researchers?Again if find this exceptionally odd. If this is true why would one need inter library loan or even o go to a library to research a rare book, when supposdly they can just request a copy? On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, The things you reference are different parts of the section. For scholarly research purposes, libraries may make copies of entire print works for users (to become their property) if they are unavailable for sale in new OR used copies at a fair price. Libraries may make up to three copies of any work for preservation or replacement purposes under certain circumstances (outlined in the law and detailed in this tool). These exceptions are clearly written into the law. This tool just provides a more convenient and understandable means of understanding the law and documenting practice, should their copying under 108 come into question. If you go to the Create PDF section for Preservation or Replacement, you will see that the restriction on copies leaving the library is clearly spelled out and the user is required to assert that they will not be made available to the public outside the library, if they are to continue. Let me know if you have any more questions after you've reviewed these sections. mb On Jun 22, 2011, at 5:38 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Needless to say I am a bit confused by this, particularly the issue of entire copies being made or replaced. Perhaps I am misreading something but it appears you are saying you can make one copy of a BOOK to someone who requests it , if it is not for sale at a fair price? Is that in fact what you are saying? Then of course you say you can make 3 copies of a film if it is out of print and deteriorating . May I ask why the specific declaration in section 108 that the copies may NOT leave the library premise is missing. Do you just get to pick and choose which parts of the section you like? This is dead serious question. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. http://www.districtdispatch.org/ http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, mb Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.commailto:jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
That is what I thought, but the spinner says the person keeps it or am I misreading that? On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:19 AM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote: The library can, if 108 strictures and requirements are met, make the specified number of copies as replacements for items in the library's collection. The law says nothing about giving the copy (for keeps) to someone who requests it, Jessica. gary I admit I know very little on copyright for written materials, but I find it hard to believe that a library can make a copy of out of print book for someone who then gets to use keep it. I am obviously missing something here. Can you point me to the part where the researcher gets to keep a copy of an out of print but still under copyright written work? One copy per researcher or per book? Can a library make 100 copies of an out of print item for 100 different researchers?Again if find this exceptionally odd. If this is true why would one need inter library loan or even o go to a library to research a rare book, when supposdly they can just request a copy? On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, The things you reference are different parts of the section. For scholarly research purposes, libraries may make copies of entire print works for users (to become their property) if they are unavailable for sale in new OR used copies at a fair price. Libraries may make up to three copies of any work for preservation or replacement purposes under certain circumstances (outlined in the law and detailed in this tool). These exceptions are clearly written into the law. This tool just provides a more convenient and understandable means of understanding the law and documenting practice, should their copying under 108 come into question. If you go to the Create PDF section for Preservation or Replacement, you will see that the restriction on copies leaving the library is clearly spelled out and the user is required to assert that they will not be made available to the public outside the library, if they are to continue. Let me know if you have any more questions after you've reviewed these sections. mb On Jun 22, 2011, at 5:38 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Needless to say I am a bit confused by this, particularly the issue of entire copies being made or replaced. Perhaps I am misreading something but it appears you are saying you can make one copy of a BOOK to someone who requests it , if it is not for sale at a fair price? Is that in fact what you are saying? Then of course you say you can make 3 copies of a film if it is out of print and deteriorating . May I ask why the specific declaration in section 108 that the copies may NOT leave the library premise is missing. Do you just get to pick and choose which parts of the section you like? This is dead serious question. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. http://www.districtdispatch.org/ http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, mb Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.commailto:jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. VIDEOLIB is
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
Well, 108(e)(1) does say: (e) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to the entire work, or to a substantial part of it, made from the collection of a library or archives where the user makes his or her request or from that of another library or archives, if the library or archives has first determined, on the basis of a reasonable investigation, that a copy or phonorecord of the copyrighted work cannot be obtained at a fair price, if - (1) the copy or phonorecord becomes the property of the user, and the library or archives has had no notice that the copy or phonorecord would be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research; and Cheers, Matt From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Jessica Rosner Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 11:25 AM To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner That is what I thought, but the spinner says the person keeps it or am I misreading that? On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:19 AM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edumailto:ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote: The library can, if 108 strictures and requirements are met, make the specified number of copies as replacements for items in the library's collection. The law says nothing about giving the copy (for keeps) to someone who requests it, Jessica. gary I admit I know very little on copyright for written materials, but I find it hard to believe that a library can make a copy of out of print book for someone who then gets to use keep it. I am obviously missing something here. Can you point me to the part where the researcher gets to keep a copy of an out of print but still under copyright written work? One copy per researcher or per book? Can a library make 100 copies of an out of print item for 100 different researchers?Again if find this exceptionally odd. If this is true why would one need inter library loan or even o go to a library to research a rare book, when supposdly they can just request a copy? On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, The things you reference are different parts of the section. For scholarly research purposes, libraries may make copies of entire print works for users (to become their property) if they are unavailable for sale in new OR used copies at a fair price. Libraries may make up to three copies of any work for preservation or replacement purposes under certain circumstances (outlined in the law and detailed in this tool). These exceptions are clearly written into the law. This tool just provides a more convenient and understandable means of understanding the law and documenting practice, should their copying under 108 come into question. If you go to the Create PDF section for Preservation or Replacement, you will see that the restriction on copies leaving the library is clearly spelled out and the user is required to assert that they will not be made available to the public outside the library, if they are to continue. Let me know if you have any more questions after you've reviewed these sections. mb On Jun 22, 2011, at 5:38 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Needless to say I am a bit confused by this, particularly the issue of entire copies being made or replaced. Perhaps I am misreading something but it appears you are saying you can make one copy of a BOOK to someone who requests it , if it is not for sale at a fair price? Is that in fact what you are saying? Then of course you say you can make 3 copies of a film if it is out of print and deteriorating . May I ask why the specific declaration in section 108 that the copies may NOT leave the library premise is missing. Do you just get to pick and choose which parts of the section you like? This is dead serious question. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. http://www.districtdispatch.org/ http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, mb Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
I think the latter... g That is what I thought, but the spinner says the person keeps it or am I misreading that? On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:19 AM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote: The library can, if 108 strictures and requirements are met, make the specified number of copies as replacements for items in the library's collection. The law says nothing about giving the copy (for keeps) to someone who requests it, Jessica. gary I admit I know very little on copyright for written materials, but I find it hard to believe that a library can make a copy of out of print book for someone who then gets to use keep it. I am obviously missing something here. Can you point me to the part where the researcher gets to keep a copy of an out of print but still under copyright written work? One copy per researcher or per book? Can a library make 100 copies of an out of print item for 100 different researchers?Again if find this exceptionally odd. If this is true why would one need inter library loan or even o go to a library to research a rare book, when supposdly they can just request a copy? On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, The things you reference are different parts of the section. For scholarly research purposes, libraries may make copies of entire print works for users (to become their property) if they are unavailable for sale in new OR used copies at a fair price. Libraries may make up to three copies of any work for preservation or replacement purposes under certain circumstances (outlined in the law and detailed in this tool). These exceptions are clearly written into the law. This tool just provides a more convenient and understandable means of understanding the law and documenting practice, should their copying under 108 come into question. If you go to the Create PDF section for Preservation or Replacement, you will see that the restriction on copies leaving the library is clearly spelled out and the user is required to assert that they will not be made available to the public outside the library, if they are to continue. Let me know if you have any more questions after you've reviewed these sections. mb On Jun 22, 2011, at 5:38 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Needless to say I am a bit confused by this, particularly the issue of entire copies being made or replaced. Perhaps I am misreading something but it appears you are saying you can make one copy of a BOOK to someone who requests it , if it is not for sale at a fair price? Is that in fact what you are saying? Then of course you say you can make 3 copies of a film if it is out of print and deteriorating . May I ask why the specific declaration in section 108 that the copies may NOT leave the library premise is missing. Do you just get to pick and choose which parts of the section you like? This is dead serious question. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. http://www.districtdispatch.org/ http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, mb Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.commailto:jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions,
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
I think you are missing a HUGE restriction on this. Directly below this it states The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to a copy, made from the collection of a library or archives where the user makes his or her request or from that of another library or archives, of no more than one article or other contribution to a copyrighted collection or periodical issue, or to a copy or phonorecord of a small part of any other copyrighted work, if — In short you can make a copy of a SMALL PORTION of a larger work or one article NOT an entire book or film (well visual works were not part of this but just to make it clear) That seems again to be a major missing element of the spinner. Do you (or Michael) have a different interpretation? Honestly if it were legal to make a copy of any out of print work for a researcher what exactly would be the point of copyright and/or research. One assumes that researchers actually have to research as in go look at rare items themselves or in some cases obtain them on interlibrary loan. Otherwise research libraries would be nothing more than high end Kinkos. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Ball, James (jmb4aw) jmb...@eservices.virginia.edu wrote: Well, 108(e)(1) does say: ** ** (e) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to the entire work, or to a substantial part of it, made from the collection of a library or archives where the user makes his or her request or from that of another library or archives, if the library or archives has first determined, on the basis of a reasonable investigation, that a copy or phonorecord of the copyrighted work cannot be obtained at a fair price, if — (1) the copy or phonorecord becomes the property of the user, and the library or archives has had no notice that the copy or phonorecord would be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research; and Cheers, ** ** Matt ** ** ** ** ** ** *From:* videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] *On Behalf Of *Jessica Rosner *Sent:* Thursday, June 23, 2011 11:25 AM *To:* videolib@lists.berkeley.edu *Subject:* Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner ** ** That is what I thought, but the spinner says the person keeps it or am I misreading that? On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:19 AM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote:** ** The library can, if 108 strictures and requirements are met, make the specified number of copies as replacements for items in the library's collection. The law says nothing about giving the copy (for keeps) to someone who requests it, Jessica. gary I admit I know very little on copyright for written materials, but I find it hard to believe that a library can make a copy of out of print book for someone who then gets to use keep it. I am obviously missing something here. Can you point me to the part where the researcher gets to keep a copy of an out of print but still under copyright written work? One copy per researcher or per book? Can a library make 100 copies of an out of print item for 100 different researchers?Again if find this exceptionally odd. If this is true why would one need inter library loan or even o go to a library to research a rare book, when supposdly they can just request a copy? On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, The things you reference are different parts of the section. For scholarly research purposes, libraries may make copies of entire print works for users (to become their property) if they are unavailable for sale in new OR used copies at a fair price. Libraries may make up to three copies of any work for preservation or replacement purposes under certain circumstances (outlined in the law and detailed in this tool). These exceptions are clearly written into the law. This tool just provides a more convenient and understandable means of understanding the law and documenting practice, should their copying under 108 come into question. If you go to the Create PDF section for Preservation or Replacement, you will see that the restriction on copies leaving the library is clearly spelled out and the user is required to assert that they will not be made available to the public outside the library, if they are to continue. Let me know if you have any more questions after you've reviewed these sections. mb On Jun 22, 2011, at 5:38 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Needless to say I am a bit confused by this, particularly the issue of entire copies being made or replaced. Perhaps I am misreading something but it appears you are saying you can make one copy of a BOOK to someone who requests it , if it is not for sale at a fair price? Is that in fact what you are saying? Then of course you say you can
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
Just glance at the law. This piece (entire works [print] for users) is in pretty clear language. It isn't just that things have to be out of print, though, they have to be unavailable new or used, so it is much more limiting than just out of print. mb On Jun 23, 2011, at 8:51 AM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote: I think the latter... g That is what I thought, but the spinner says the person keeps it or am I misreading that? On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:19 AM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote: The library can, if 108 strictures and requirements are met, make the specified number of copies as replacements for items in the library's collection. The law says nothing about giving the copy (for keeps) to someone who requests it, Jessica. gary I admit I know very little on copyright for written materials, but I find it hard to believe that a library can make a copy of out of print book for someone who then gets to use keep it. I am obviously missing something here. Can you point me to the part where the researcher gets to keep a copy of an out of print but still under copyright written work? One copy per researcher or per book? Can a library make 100 copies of an out of print item for 100 different researchers?Again if find this exceptionally odd. If this is true why would one need inter library loan or even o go to a library to research a rare book, when supposdly they can just request a copy? On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, The things you reference are different parts of the section. For scholarly research purposes, libraries may make copies of entire print works for users (to become their property) if they are unavailable for sale in new OR used copies at a fair price. Libraries may make up to three copies of any work for preservation or replacement purposes under certain circumstances (outlined in the law and detailed in this tool). These exceptions are clearly written into the law. This tool just provides a more convenient and understandable means of understanding the law and documenting practice, should their copying under 108 come into question. If you go to the Create PDF section for Preservation or Replacement, you will see that the restriction on copies leaving the library is clearly spelled out and the user is required to assert that they will not be made available to the public outside the library, if they are to continue. Let me know if you have any more questions after you've reviewed these sections. mb On Jun 22, 2011, at 5:38 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Needless to say I am a bit confused by this, particularly the issue of entire copies being made or replaced. Perhaps I am misreading something but it appears you are saying you can make one copy of a BOOK to someone who requests it , if it is not for sale at a fair price? Is that in fact what you are saying? Then of course you say you can make 3 copies of a film if it is out of print and deteriorating . May I ask why the specific declaration in section 108 that the copies may NOT leave the library premise is missing. Do you just get to pick and choose which parts of the section you like? This is dead serious question. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. http://www.districtdispatch.org/ http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, mb Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.commailto:jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
Jessica, I think you're looking at 108(d) not 108(e) which says: (e) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to the entire work, M- From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Jessica Rosner Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 11:54 AM To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner I think you are missing a HUGE restriction on this. Directly below this it states The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to a copy, made from the collection of a library or archives where the user makes his or her request or from that of another library or archives, of no more than one article or other contribution to a copyrighted collection or periodical issue, or to a copy or phonorecord of a small part of any other copyrighted work, if - In short you can make a copy of a SMALL PORTION of a larger work or one article NOT an entire book or film (well visual works were not part of this but just to make it clear) That seems again to be a major missing element of the spinner. Do you (or Michael) have a different interpretation? Honestly if it were legal to make a copy of any out of print work for a researcher what exactly would be the point of copyright and/or research. One assumes that researchers actually have to research as in go look at rare items themselves or in some cases obtain them on interlibrary loan. Otherwise research libraries would be nothing more than high end Kinkos. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Ball, James (jmb4aw) jmb...@eservices.virginia.edumailto:jmb...@eservices.virginia.edu wrote: Well, 108(e)(1) does say: (e) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to the entire work, or to a substantial part of it, made from the collection of a library or archives where the user makes his or her request or from that of another library or archives, if the library or archives has first determined, on the basis of a reasonable investigation, that a copy or phonorecord of the copyrighted work cannot be obtained at a fair price, if - (1) the copy or phonorecord becomes the property of the user, and the library or archives has had no notice that the copy or phonorecord would be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research; and Cheers, Matt From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edumailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edumailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Jessica Rosner Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 11:25 AM To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edumailto:videolib@lists.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner That is what I thought, but the spinner says the person keeps it or am I misreading that? On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:19 AM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edumailto:ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote: The library can, if 108 strictures and requirements are met, make the specified number of copies as replacements for items in the library's collection. The law says nothing about giving the copy (for keeps) to someone who requests it, Jessica. gary I admit I know very little on copyright for written materials, but I find it hard to believe that a library can make a copy of out of print book for someone who then gets to use keep it. I am obviously missing something here. Can you point me to the part where the researcher gets to keep a copy of an out of print but still under copyright written work? One copy per researcher or per book? Can a library make 100 copies of an out of print item for 100 different researchers?Again if find this exceptionally odd. If this is true why would one need inter library loan or even o go to a library to research a rare book, when supposdly they can just request a copy? On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, The things you reference are different parts of the section. For scholarly research purposes, libraries may make copies of entire print works for users (to become their property) if they are unavailable for sale in new OR used copies at a fair price. Libraries may make up to three copies of any work for preservation or replacement purposes under certain circumstances (outlined in the law and detailed in this tool). These exceptions are clearly written into the law. This tool just provides a more convenient and understandable means of understanding the law and documenting practice, should their copying under 108 come into question. If you go to the Create PDF section for Preservation or Replacement, you will see that the restriction on copies leaving the library is clearly spelled out and the user is required to assert that they will not be made available to the public outside the library, if they are to continue. Let me know if you have any
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
Gary, I am not arguing that provision, I am arguing that you can not make an entire copy of a work and give it to researcher as the spinner claims. I thought that is what we were discussing. I am in now way saying a library can not make a preservation copy though I do think people are taking advantage of the situation to just make DVDs of videos they find inconvenient. This is a different section and it clearly states that for a copy made for a RESEARCHER it may only be either a portion of a work or a short work. Again the spinner indicates that you can basically make a copy for any researcher who wants one and I believe we both agree that is illegal and would in fact turn libraries into Kinkos. Again I am referring to the Entire Copy of a Work for Researcher part of the spinner which claims a library can just make a copy of out of print work for a researcher NOT the preservation replacement section. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:01 PM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote: You're absolutely wrong, Jessica. The intent of this portion of the law is to allow libraries to preserve physically endangered materials. The law categorically allows reproduction of entire works for such purposes, if conditions are met. (And the conditions are pretty weird--e.g. use in building only) In the case of video (and books), these allowances are the only slim protection against valuable cultural and intellectual capital being lost for future researchers and teachers. What would you suggest, letting this stuff rot and crumble into dust? I honestly don't see how you're coming up with this stuff. Gary I think you are missing a HUGE restriction on this. Directly below this it states The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to a copy, made from the collection of a library or archives where the user makes his or her request or from that of another library or archives, of no more than one article or other contribution to a copyrighted collection or periodical issue, or to a copy or phonorecord of a small part of any other copyrighted work, if — In short you can make a copy of a SMALL PORTION of a larger work or one article NOT an entire book or film (well visual works were not part of this but just to make it clear) That seems again to be a major missing element of the spinner. Do you (or Michael) have a different interpretation? Honestly if it were legal to make a copy of any out of print work for a researcher what exactly would be the point of copyright and/or research. One assumes that researchers actually have to research as in go look at rare items themselves or in some cases obtain them on interlibrary loan. Otherwise research libraries would be nothing more than high end Kinkos. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Ball, James (jmb4aw) jmb...@eservices.virginia.edu wrote: Well, 108(e)(1) does say: ** ** (e) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to the entire work, or to a substantial part of it, made from the collection of a library or archives where the user makes his or her request or from that of another library or archives, if the library or archives has first determined, on the basis of a reasonable investigation, that a copy or phonorecord of the copyrighted work cannot be obtained at a fair price, if — (1) the copy or phonorecord becomes the property of the user, and the library or archives has had no notice that the copy or phonorecord would be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research; and Cheers, ** ** Matt ** ** ** ** ** ** *From:* videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] *On Behalf Of *Jessica Rosner *Sent:* Thursday, June 23, 2011 11:25 AM *To:* videolib@lists.berkeley.edu *Subject:* Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner ** ** That is what I thought, but the spinner says the person keeps it or am I misreading that? On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:19 AM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote:** ** The library can, if 108 strictures and requirements are met, make the specified number of copies as replacements for items in the library's collection. The law says nothing about giving the copy (for keeps) to someone who requests it, Jessica. gary I admit I know very little on copyright for written materials, but I find it hard to believe that a library can make a copy of out of print book for someone who then gets to use keep it. I am obviously missing something here. Can you point me to the part where the researcher gets to keep a copy of an out of print but still under copyright written work? One copy per researcher or per book? Can a library make 100 copies of an out of print item for 100 different researchers?Again if find
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
Jessica, The section that allows for this (and has for years and years) has been cited (by Matt, I think) in this string and is also available (the fulltext of the law) from the PDF created by the spinner. It is not the spinner that says one can do this; it is the law. The spinner just makes it more easily understandable and ensures people document their use of 108, so that they can be held accountable for using it correctly. Something I think you would be in favor of. If you have a problem with the law as it is written, that is something to bring up if and when 108 is again revisited. mb On Jun 23, 2011, at 9:18 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Gary, I am not arguing that provision, I am arguing that you can not make an entire copy of a work and give it to researcher as the spinner claims. I thought that is what we were discussing. I am in now way saying a library can not make a preservation copy though I do think people are taking advantage of the situation to just make DVDs of videos they find inconvenient. This is a different section and it clearly states that for a copy made for a RESEARCHER it may only be either a portion of a work or a short work. Again the spinner indicates that you can basically make a copy for any researcher who wants one and I believe we both agree that is illegal and would in fact turn libraries into Kinkos. Again I am referring to the Entire Copy of a Work for Researcher part of the spinner which claims a library can just make a copy of out of print work for a researcher NOT the preservation replacement section. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:01 PM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edumailto:ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote: You're absolutely wrong, Jessica. The intent of this portion of the law is to allow libraries to preserve physically endangered materials. The law categorically allows reproduction of entire works for such purposes, if conditions are met. (And the conditions are pretty weird--e.g. use in building only) In the case of video (and books), these allowances are the only slim protection against valuable cultural and intellectual capital being lost for future researchers and teachers. What would you suggest, letting this stuff rot and crumble into dust? I honestly don't see how you're coming up with this stuff. Gary I think you are missing a HUGE restriction on this. Directly below this it states The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to a copy, made from the collection of a library or archives where the user makes his or her request or from that of another library or archives, of no more than one article or other contribution to a copyrighted collection or periodical issue, or to a copy or phonorecord of a small part of any other copyrighted work, if — In short you can make a copy of a SMALL PORTION of a larger work or one article NOT an entire book or film (well visual works were not part of this but just to make it clear) That seems again to be a major missing element of the spinner. Do you (or Michael) have a different interpretation? Honestly if it were legal to make a copy of any out of print work for a researcher what exactly would be the point of copyright and/or research. One assumes that researchers actually have to research as in go look at rare items themselves or in some cases obtain them on interlibrary loan. Otherwise research libraries would be nothing more than high end Kinkos. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Ball, James (jmb4aw) jmb...@eservices.virginia.edumailto:jmb...@eservices.virginia.edu wrote: Well, 108(e)(1) does say: ** ** (e) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section apply to the entire work, or to a substantial part of it, made from the collection of a library or archives where the user makes his or her request or from that of another library or archives, if the library or archives has first determined, on the basis of a reasonable investigation, that a copy or phonorecord of the copyrighted work cannot be obtained at a fair price, if — (1) the copy or phonorecord becomes the property of the user, and the library or archives has had no notice that the copy or phonorecord would be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research; and Cheers, ** ** Matt ** ** ** ** ** ** *From:* videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edumailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edumailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] *On Behalf Of *Jessica Rosner *Sent:* Thursday, June 23, 2011 11:25 AM *To:* videolib@lists.berkeley.edumailto:videolib@lists.berkeley.edu *Subject:* Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner ** ** That is what I thought, but the spinner says the person keeps it or am I misreading that? On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:19 AM, ghand...@library.berkeley.edumailto:ghand...@library.berkeley.edu wrote
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
The problem Michael is that the Spinner tends to highlight the most generous provisions of copyright without getting to the details until you click a few times. As noted this provision does not apply to AV materials which is what we generally discuss here. Likewise the provision on the digital copies not leaving the premise is further down. I get that the ALA wants to highlight the easy stuff, but I remain very cynical that the academics and some librarians who use this will actually read the restrictions and just jump at the hey I can make a copy part. I also remain concerned in terms of AV material that the material must be a legal copy is not mentioned in most cases. One would like to assume that everyone instinctively knows this, but too many videos/dvds have been out there illegally for me to be in any way trusting particularly when the major film studies association and the head of a major library preservation project assert that anything ever taped off television is a legal copy even if it was 20 years ago and you got it from professor Smith. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, ** ** Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. ** ** http://www.districtdispatch.org/ ** ** http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ ** ** Please let me know if you have any questions. ** ** Thanks, ** ** ** ** mb ** ** Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edu ** ** VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
Jessica, But if you rely on the law as written, it is much more confusing than any of this. Figuring out any of the criteria you mention in the law takes real work and concentration, not just a click or two, and even with that time a concentration, it is easy to get things mixed up (as we've seen on this listserv). If people follow the workflow for the tool, they will get all the information on the spinner. Everything pertinent is included, so even if they didn't click more criteria, they will still get it. If they go to the law, there is absolutely no guarantee that they will get the information they need. As such, I don't see what the down side is. Is the goal to obscure the law and hope no one uses it, or is it to educate and ensure people understand it and take advantage of it correctly? Were people to become better educated through the use of tools like this, there would be fewer misuses of the law (in my mind, though I tend to feel being better educated is always a good thing). mb On Jun 23, 2011, at 10:44 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote: The problem Michael is that the Spinner tends to highlight the most generous provisions of copyright without getting to the details until you click a few times. As noted this provision does not apply to AV materials which is what we generally discuss here. Likewise the provision on the digital copies not leaving the premise is further down. I get that the ALA wants to highlight the easy stuff, but I remain very cynical that the academics and some librarians who use this will actually read the restrictions and just jump at the hey I can make a copy part. I also remain concerned in terms of AV material that the material must be a legal copy is not mentioned in most cases. One would like to assume that everyone instinctively knows this, but too many videos/dvds have been out there illegally for me to be in any way trusting particularly when the major film studies association and the head of a major library preservation project assert that anything ever taped off television is a legal copy even if it was 20 years ago and you got it from professor Smith. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. http://www.districtdispatch.org/ http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, mb Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897tel:224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785tel:212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.commailto:jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
Again Michael my concern is that the spinner highlights at the front everything you can do but makes it a bit of work to find the restrictions. It all depends on who uses it and generally my cynicism is that people who are looking for a way out use something in a way they probably can't. I understand it has the best intentions, but I really wish the instruction was just to read the damn copyright law. I don't really get your claim that relying on the written law makes things more confusing. While some issues like the portion you can use for fair use are open to debate, most of it is reasonably clear. I also understand that rights holders often present an extreme view in which face to face and fair use barely exist. In the old days I would not be so concerned, but with massive illegal activities on campuses (most being done by professors and students but an increasing number being sanctioned by the administration and in some cases libraries) regarding copyrighted works I tend to think the worst. As you know I have had a couple of interesting situations regarding ALA in particular, the highlight of which where A. Having the previously open meeting closed because why would one want a rights holder to hear what was being discussed B. having a major figure in the field and head of major sanctioned preservation project tell a librarian at an ALA session NOT to try to contact a rights holder if they wanted to determine if a work was in fact rare and needed to be preserved because they would only cause trouble) I have become very, very cynical. I can't say enough how upset distributors and filmmakers are that the academic community which they believed where their friends have in many cases simply ripped them off without a thought. Worst of all I don't see things getting better but much, much worse as institutions under budget crunches and teachers under the belief that anything they want to use should be available for little or no cost continue to drive independent companies filmmakers out of business while claiming they are just want to make material easily available. I get this is must be the thousandth time I have said this and on a scale of 1-10 my issues with the spinner are small, but I do see them as part of an increasing divide between the library community and people trying to get paid fairly for works they made and spent a lot of money doing it. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, But if you rely on the law as written, it is much more confusing than any of this. Figuring out any of the criteria you mention in the law takes real work and concentration, not just a click or two, and even with that time a concentration, it is easy to get things mixed up (as we've seen on this listserv). If people follow the workflow for the tool, they will get all the information on the spinner. Everything pertinent is included, so even if they didn't click more criteria, they will still get it. If they go to the law, there is absolutely no guarantee that they will get the information they need. As such, I don't see what the down side is. Is the goal to obscure the law and hope no one uses it, or is it to educate and ensure people understand it and take advantage of it correctly? Were people to become better educated through the use of tools like this, there would be fewer misuses of the law (in my mind, though I tend to feel being better educated is always a good thing). mb On Jun 23, 2011, at 10:44 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote: The problem Michael is that the Spinner tends to highlight the most generous provisions of copyright without getting to the details until you click a few times. As noted this provision does not apply to AV materials which is what we generally discuss here. Likewise the provision on the digital copies not leaving the premise is further down. I get that the ALA wants to highlight the easy stuff, but I remain very cynical that the academics and some librarians who use this will actually read the restrictions and just jump at the hey I can make a copy part. I also remain concerned in terms of AV material that the material must be a legal copy is not mentioned in most cases. One would like to assume that everyone instinctively knows this, but too many videos/dvds have been out there illegally for me to be in any way trusting particularly when the major film studies association and the head of a major library preservation project assert that anything ever taped off television is a legal copy even if it was 20 years ago and you got it from professor Smith. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
The directions clearly state: Clicking for details will bring up any other important qualifying criteria or explanatory notes -- emphasis mine On Jun 23, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Again Michael my concern is that the spinner highlights at the front everything you can do but makes it a bit of work to find the restrictions. It all depends on who uses it and generally my cynicism is that people who are looking for a way out use something in a way they probably can't. I understand it has the best intentions, but I really wish the instruction was just to read the damn copyright law. I don't really get your claim that relying on the written law makes things more confusing. While some issues like the portion you can use for fair use are open to debate, most of it is reasonably clear. I also understand that rights holders often present an extreme view in which face to face and fair use barely exist. In the old days I would not be so concerned, but with massive illegal activities on campuses (most being done by professors and students but an increasing number being sanctioned by the administration and in some cases libraries) regarding copyrighted works I tend to think the worst. As you know I have had a couple of interesting situations regarding ALA in particular, the highlight of which where A. Having the previously open meeting closed because why would one want a rights holder to hear what was being discussed B. having a major figure in the field and head of major sanctioned preservation project tell a librarian at an ALA session NOT to try to contact a rights holder if they wanted to determine if a work was in fact rare and needed to be preserved because they would only cause trouble) I have become very, very cynical. I can't say enough how upset distributors and filmmakers are that the academic community which they believed where their friends have in many cases simply ripped them off without a thought. Worst of all I don't see things getting better but much, much worse as institutions under budget crunches and teachers under the belief that anything they want to use should be available for little or no cost continue to drive independent companies filmmakers out of business while claiming they are just want to make material easily available. I get this is must be the thousandth time I have said this and on a scale of 1-10 my issues with the spinner are small, but I do see them as part of an increasing divide between the library community and people trying to get paid fairly for works they made and spent a lot of money doing it. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, But if you rely on the law as written, it is much more confusing than any of this. Figuring out any of the criteria you mention in the law takes real work and concentration, not just a click or two, and even with that time a concentration, it is easy to get things mixed up (as we've seen on this listserv). If people follow the workflow for the tool, they will get all the information on the spinner. Everything pertinent is included, so even if they didn't click more criteria, they will still get it. If they go to the law, there is absolutely no guarantee that they will get the information they need. As such, I don't see what the down side is. Is the goal to obscure the law and hope no one uses it, or is it to educate and ensure people understand it and take advantage of it correctly? Were people to become better educated through the use of tools like this, there would be fewer misuses of the law (in my mind, though I tend to feel being better educated is always a good thing). mb On Jun 23, 2011, at 10:44 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote: The problem Michael is that the Spinner tends to highlight the most generous provisions of copyright without getting to the details until you click a few times. As noted this provision does not apply to AV materials which is what we generally discuss here. Likewise the provision on the digital copies not leaving the premise is further down. I get that the ALA wants to highlight the easy stuff, but I remain very cynical that the academics and some librarians who use this will actually read the restrictions and just jump at the hey I can make a copy part. I also remain concerned in terms of AV material that the material must be a legal copy is not mentioned in most cases. One would like to assume that everyone instinctively knows this, but too many videos/dvds have been out there illegally for me to be in any way trusting particularly when the major film studies association and the head of a major library preservation project assert that anything ever taped off television is a legal copy even if it was 20 years ago and you got it from professor Smith. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer,
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
If the law were easy to read, you (who stay very much abreast of these things and are not just casually interested in copyright) would not have had questions about the legality of copying an entire work for a user, which is in the law. I always encourage people to read the law itself, too. That is why there is the option of including the entire text of the law on the PDF that is created. Don't you see value in the fact that this documents a library's use so that it can be more fully vetted, or reviewed? mb On Jun 23, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Again Michael my concern is that the spinner highlights at the front everything you can do but makes it a bit of work to find the restrictions. It all depends on who uses it and generally my cynicism is that people who are looking for a way out use something in a way they probably can't. I understand it has the best intentions, but I really wish the instruction was just to read the damn copyright law. I don't really get your claim that relying on the written law makes things more confusing. While some issues like the portion you can use for fair use are open to debate, most of it is reasonably clear. I also understand that rights holders often present an extreme view in which face to face and fair use barely exist. In the old days I would not be so concerned, but with massive illegal activities on campuses (most being done by professors and students but an increasing number being sanctioned by the administration and in some cases libraries) regarding copyrighted works I tend to think the worst. As you know I have had a couple of interesting situations regarding ALA in particular, the highlight of which where A. Having the previously open meeting closed because why would one want a rights holder to hear what was being discussed B. having a major figure in the field and head of major sanctioned preservation project tell a librarian at an ALA session NOT to try to contact a rights holder if they wanted to determine if a work was in fact rare and needed to be preserved because they would only cause trouble) I have become very, very cynical. I can't say enough how upset distributors and filmmakers are that the academic community which they believed where their friends have in many cases simply ripped them off without a thought. Worst of all I don't see things getting better but much, much worse as institutions under budget crunches and teachers under the belief that anything they want to use should be available for little or no cost continue to drive independent companies filmmakers out of business while claiming they are just want to make material easily available. I get this is must be the thousandth time I have said this and on a scale of 1-10 my issues with the spinner are small, but I do see them as part of an increasing divide between the library community and people trying to get paid fairly for works they made and spent a lot of money doing it. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, But if you rely on the law as written, it is much more confusing than any of this. Figuring out any of the criteria you mention in the law takes real work and concentration, not just a click or two, and even with that time a concentration, it is easy to get things mixed up (as we've seen on this listserv). If people follow the workflow for the tool, they will get all the information on the spinner. Everything pertinent is included, so even if they didn't click more criteria, they will still get it. If they go to the law, there is absolutely no guarantee that they will get the information they need. As such, I don't see what the down side is. Is the goal to obscure the law and hope no one uses it, or is it to educate and ensure people understand it and take advantage of it correctly? Were people to become better educated through the use of tools like this, there would be fewer misuses of the law (in my mind, though I tend to feel being better educated is always a good thing). mb On Jun 23, 2011, at 10:44 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote: The problem Michael is that the Spinner tends to highlight the most generous provisions of copyright without getting to the details until you click a few times. As noted this provision does not apply to AV materials which is what we generally discuss here. Likewise the provision on the digital copies not leaving the premise is further down. I get that the ALA wants to highlight the easy stuff, but I remain very cynical that the academics and some librarians who use this will actually read the restrictions and just jump at the hey I can make a copy part. I also remain concerned in terms of AV material that the material must be a legal copy is not mentioned in most cases. One would like to assume that everyone instinctively knows this, but too many videos/dvds have been out there
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
Except that provision does not effect AV and I do not stay abreast of all copyright, I am AV centric. I know zilch for instance about copyright issues related to say computer programs. I do think the it is helpful to have some discussion, explination of copyright as related to visual materials, but again I worry that anyone needing to make a decision needs to read the relevent sections in their entirety.The simple fact that fair use is often being claimed as the reason one can show an entire film in a class ( instead of face to face ) tends to indicate to me that there is just a ton of misinformation out there that reading the actual law would fix. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: If the law were easy to read, you (who stay very much abreast of these things and are not just casually interested in copyright) would not have had questions about the legality of copying an entire work for a user, which is in the law. I always encourage people to read the law itself, too. That is why there is the option of including the entire text of the law on the PDF that is created. Don't you see value in the fact that this documents a library's use so that it can be more fully vetted, or reviewed? mb On Jun 23, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Again Michael my concern is that the spinner highlights at the front everything you can do but makes it a bit of work to find the restrictions. It all depends on who uses it and generally my cynicism is that people who are looking for a way out use something in a way they probably can't. I understand it has the best intentions, but I really wish the instruction was just to read the damn copyright law. I don't really get your claim that relying on the written law makes things more confusing. While some issues like the portion you can use for fair use are open to debate, most of it is reasonably clear. I also understand that rights holders often present an extreme view in which face to face and fair use barely exist. In the old days I would not be so concerned, but with massive illegal activities on campuses (most being done by professors and students but an increasing number being sanctioned by the administration and in some cases libraries) regarding copyrighted works I tend to think the worst. As you know I have had a couple of interesting situations regarding ALA in particular, the highlight of which where A. Having the previously open meeting closed because why would one want a rights holder to hear what was being discussed B. having a major figure in the field and head of major sanctioned preservation project tell a librarian at an ALA session NOT to try to contact a rights holder if they wanted to determine if a work was in fact rare and needed to be preserved because they would only cause trouble) I have become very, very cynical. I can't say enough how upset distributors and filmmakers are that the academic community which they believed where their friends have in many cases simply ripped them off without a thought. Worst of all I don't see things getting better but much, much worse as institutions under budget crunches and teachers under the belief that anything they want to use should be available for little or no cost continue to drive independent companies filmmakers out of business while claiming they are just want to make material easily available. I get this is must be the thousandth time I have said this and on a scale of 1-10 my issues with the spinner are small, but I do see them as part of an increasing divide between the library community and people trying to get paid fairly for works they made and spent a lot of money doing it. On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Jessica, But if you rely on the law as written, it is much more confusing than any of this. Figuring out any of the criteria you mention in the law takes real work and concentration, not just a click or two, and even with that time a concentration, it is easy to get things mixed up (as we've seen on this listserv). If people follow the workflow for the tool, they will get all the information on the spinner. Everything pertinent is included, so even if they didn't click more criteria, they will still get it. If they go to the law, there is absolutely no guarantee that they will get the information they need. As such, I don't see what the down side is. Is the goal to obscure the law and hope no one uses it, or is it to educate and ensure people understand it and take advantage of it correctly? Were people to become better educated through the use of tools like this, there would be fewer misuses of the law (in my mind, though I tend to feel being better educated is always a good thing). mb On Jun 23, 2011, at 10:44 AM, Jessica Rosner wrote: The problem Michael is that the Spinner
[Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
All, Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. http://www.districtdispatch.org/ http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, mb Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
Needless to say I am a bit confused by this, particularly the issue of entire copies being made or replaced. Perhaps I am misreading something but it appears you are saying you can make one copy of a BOOK to someone who requests it , if it is not for sale at a fair price? Is that in fact what you are saying? Then of course you say you can make 3 copies of a film if it is out of print and deteriorating . May I ask why the specific declaration in section 108 that the copies may NOT leave the library premise is missing. Do you just get to pick and choose which parts of the section you like? This is dead serious question. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, ** ** Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. ** ** http://www.districtdispatch.org/ ** ** http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ ** ** Please let me know if you have any questions. ** ** Thanks, ** ** ** ** mb ** ** Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edu ** ** VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
Jessica, The things you reference are different parts of the section. For scholarly research purposes, libraries may make copies of entire print works for users (to become their property) if they are unavailable for sale in new OR used copies at a fair price. Libraries may make up to three copies of any work for preservation or replacement purposes under certain circumstances (outlined in the law and detailed in this tool). These exceptions are clearly written into the law. This tool just provides a more convenient and understandable means of understanding the law and documenting practice, should their copying under 108 come into question. If you go to the Create PDF section for Preservation or Replacement, you will see that the restriction on copies leaving the library is clearly spelled out and the user is required to assert that they will not be made available to the public outside the library, if they are to continue. Let me know if you have any more questions after you've reviewed these sections. mb On Jun 22, 2011, at 5:38 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Needless to say I am a bit confused by this, particularly the issue of entire copies being made or replaced. Perhaps I am misreading something but it appears you are saying you can make one copy of a BOOK to someone who requests it , if it is not for sale at a fair price? Is that in fact what you are saying? Then of course you say you can make 3 copies of a film if it is out of print and deteriorating . May I ask why the specific declaration in section 108 that the copies may NOT leave the library premise is missing. Do you just get to pick and choose which parts of the section you like? This is dead serious question. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. http://www.districtdispatch.org/ http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, mb Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.commailto:jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Re: [Videolib] FW: New 108 spinner
The prohibition on digital files being made to the public outside the library is also detailed in the details provided when one click for details in that part (replacement or preservation) of the spinner. mb On Jun 22, 2011, at 8:00 PM, Brewer, Michael wrote: Jessica, The things you reference are different parts of the section. For scholarly research purposes, libraries may make copies of entire print works for users (to become their property) if they are unavailable for sale in new OR used copies at a fair price. Libraries may make up to three copies of any work for preservation or replacement purposes under certain circumstances (outlined in the law and detailed in this tool). These exceptions are clearly written into the law. This tool just provides a more convenient and understandable means of understanding the law and documenting practice, should their copying under 108 come into question. If you go to the Create PDF section for Preservation or Replacement, you will see that the restriction on copies leaving the library is clearly spelled out and the user is required to assert that they will not be made available to the public outside the library, if they are to continue. Let me know if you have any more questions after you've reviewed these sections. mb On Jun 22, 2011, at 5:38 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: Needless to say I am a bit confused by this, particularly the issue of entire copies being made or replaced. Perhaps I am misreading something but it appears you are saying you can make one copy of a BOOK to someone who requests it , if it is not for sale at a fair price? Is that in fact what you are saying? Then of course you say you can make 3 copies of a film if it is out of print and deteriorating . May I ask why the specific declaration in section 108 that the copies may NOT leave the library premise is missing. Do you just get to pick and choose which parts of the section you like? This is dead serious question. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Brewer, Michael brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: All, Please take a look at the new Section 108 Spinner 2.0, which has just been released by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy, and which I developed. Your colleagues in ILL, Document Delivery, Digital Libraries, Special Collections and other areas may be interested. This tool was created to help libraries and librarians to better understand and more programmatically take advantage of Section 108 of US Copyright Law. http://www.districtdispatch.org/ http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/ Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, mb Michael Brewer University of Arizona Libraries brew...@u.library.arizona.edumailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. -- Jessica Rosner Media Consultant 224-545-3897 (cell) 212-627-1785 (land line) jessicapros...@gmail.commailto:jessicapros...@gmail.com VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
