Re: [Videolib] Margaret Mead Film Festival

[Blandine Mercier-McGovern]

Hi Jane, 

My apologies for the delayed response.
The purchase price is $295 ( includes Public Performance Rights). The
streaming rights are $590 ( includes streaming rights for 10 years and DVD
with Public Performance Rights).  

Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. 

Cheers, 
Blandine

-Original Message-
From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu
[mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Hutchison, Jane
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 3:19 PM
To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Margaret Mead Film Festival

Hi Blandine,  Can you give me a quote for both hard copy and for licensing
it for streaming.  thanks, Jane


-Original Message-
From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu on behalf of Blandine
Mercier-McGovern
Sent: Mon 2/13/2012 1:00 PM
To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Margaret Mead Film Festival
 
Hi Jane,

 

The Cinema Guild handles PLUG AND PRAY. 

The film is available for purchase at
http://cinemaguild.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD
 &Product_Code=2393&Store_Code=TCGS

Feel free to contact me off-list if I can be of any further assistance. 

 

Cheers, 

Blandine

 

---

Blandine Mercier-McGovern

The Cinema Guild

115 West 30th Street, Ste. 800

New York, NY 10001

T: 212.685.6242 | F: 212.685.4717

  www.cinemaguild.com

Follow us at   @CGeducational

 

 

 

From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu
[mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Hutchison, Jane
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 12:20 PM
To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: [Videolib] Margaret Mead Film Festival

 

We just had a showing of several films from the Margaret Mead Film Festival
on our campus.  We'd like to purchase several of them, but I have only been
able to find vendors in Europe for them.  Any domestic distributors for the
following titles?

 

Because We Were Born

A Mountain Musical

Plug & Pray

There was Once an Island

 

Thanks!

 

Jane B. Hutchison

Associate Director  Member

Instruction & Research Technology  CCUMC: Leadership
in Media & Academic Technology

William Paterson University
http://www.ccumc.org

Wayne, NJ 07470

973-720-2980 (work)

973-418-7727 (cell)

973-720-2585 (facs)

hutchis...@wpunj.edu

 

  _  


Spam
Not spam
Forget previous vote




--
BEGIN-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
--

Teach CanIt if this mail (ID 01Gz8mf4W) is spam:
Spam:
http://mx1.websitesource.com/canit/b.php?i=01Gz8mf4W&m=df66c1209211&c=s
Not spam:
http://mx1.websitesource.com/canit/b.php?i=01Gz8mf4W&m=df66c1209211&c=n
Forget vote:
http://mx1.websitesource.com/canit/b.php?i=01Gz8mf4W&m=df66c1209211&c=f
--
END-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS



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] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

[Schmitt, Mike]

There seems to be this notion from faculty at my campus that they can take a 
program with copyright and place the entire movie on D2L or other online 
sources.  I don't believe a campus has the right to place an entire program 
online for students to watch at their convenience.  I don't believe the TEACH 
Act or Fair Use cover this type of situation.  If someone can point to a 
particular piece of copyright law that would illustrate this that would be 
helpful.

Does anyone have specific examples of campuses be targeted/fined for copyright 
infringement?  

I would appreciate any assistance you can provide.

Thanks,

Mike Schmitt
UW-Green Bay

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] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

[ghandman]

Hi Mike

Well...you've asked a question that gets at an argument that has probably
garnered four or five hundred posts on this list (and others as well) in
the last few years alone.  The answer is hotly debated, to say the least,
and is currently being tested in courts:  UCLA vs Association for Media
Information and Equipment (AIME)...

There are, in other words, no easy or definite answers.  Take a look at
the videolib archive and search under the keywords UCLA, ARL (which has
developed a controversial set of Fair Use Best Practices) and you'll get a
sampling of the conversations regarding your question.

videolib archive is at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/videolib@lists.berkeley.edu/

Older posts archived at: http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/VideoLib/archive.html

Gary Handman

> There seems to be this notion from faculty at my campus that they can take
> a program with copyright and place the entire movie on D2L or other online
> sources.  I don't believe a campus has the right to place an entire
> program online for students to watch at their convenience.  I don't
> believe the TEACH Act or Fair Use cover this type of situation.  If
> someone can point to a particular piece of copyright law that would
> illustrate this that would be helpful.
>
> Does anyone have specific examples of campuses be targeted/fined for
> copyright infringement?
>
> I would appreciate any assistance you can provide.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike Schmitt
> UW-Green Bay
>
> 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.
>


Gary Handman
Director
Media Resources Center
Moffitt Library
UC Berkeley

510-643-8566
ghand...@library.berkeley.edu
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC

"I have always preferred the reflection of life to life itself."
--Francois Truffaut


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] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

[Dennis Doros]

Dear Mike,

Gary beat me to it, but my email was mostly composed already...

You might want to check the last week of Videolib since this is debated to
the extreme here on the listserv. One thing, is that if it's DVD, you would
be breaking encryption which is a no-no no matter what in the Digital
Millenium Copyright
Act.
Distributors, of course, also think that Fair Use (in terms of "portion" of
film and in commercial harm to the film -- the latter which we've all faced
the last few years) would also prohibit an entire work being put online. AV
Librarians say that there's no case law prohibiting use of a full-length
film. But, I would point to various cases against file-sharing internet
sites as something a court would use as precedent, even if what we are
talking about is educational.

Personally, I think that between sovereign immunity, small distributors
lack of desire to sue (since we're the one's most damaged by conversion of
formats, not the studios who have most of their best-selling material
online), and a changed societal view of what's acceptable online is why
most AV Librarians consider it acceptable -- in other words, like
jay-walking, what is a crime and what are the odds of being caught and
convicted?

Distributors and many veteran librarians (Gary has been very even-handed on
this) consider this thinking to be a double-edged sword. It can greatly
help librarians in this time of decreased budgets, but there's going to be
a lot less educational films being made or distributed without the
financial model distributors and filmmakers have depended on for the last
seventy years. In the trenches, the financial results have been
devastating. Milestone is solely dependent on television sales and overseas
distribution.

My own feeling? Full-length films (especially if encrypted) is illegal to
put online in any case. (My own feeling and based on my interpretation of
the law.) As for what I consider a portion, my rule of thumb for a
cease-and-desist on my feature films is that anything over five minutes
better be transformative and wonderful for me not to act. And for those
that are really wonderful, I send thank you notes to the creators.


-- 
Best regards,
Dennis Doros
Milestone Film & Video/Milliarium Zero
PO Box 128
Harrington Park, NJ 07640
Phone: 201-767-3117
Fax: 201-767-3035
email: milefi...@gmail.com
www.milestonefilms.com
www.comebackafrica.com
www.yougottomove.com
www.ontheboweryfilm.com
www.arayafilm.com
www.exilesfilm.com
www.wordisoutmovie.com
www.killerofsheep.com
 
Join "Milestone Film" on Facebook and Twitter!
and the
Association of Moving Image Archivists !


Follow Milestone on Twitter! 


On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Schmitt, Mike  wrote:

> There seems to be this notion from faculty at my campus that they can take
> a program with copyright and place the entire movie on D2L or other online
> sources.  I don't believe a campus has the right to place an entire program
> online for students to watch at their convenience.  I don't believe the
> TEACH Act or Fair Use cover this type of situation.  If someone can point
> to a particular piece of copyright law that would illustrate this that
> would be helpful.
>
> Does anyone have specific examples of campuses be targeted/fined for
> copyright infringement?
>
> I would appreciate any assistance you can provide.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike Schmitt
> UW-Green Bay
>
> 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] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

[Jessica Rosner]

You missed the memo Mike. You can copy and stream any film or book ever
made or published so long as a professor tells you he needs it. ARL etc
have said so and you longer have to worry about actual copyright law or
numerous legal cases that say otherwise.

I am in an especially snarky mood today. I just found a major academic
institution has
"scheduled" an open campus showing of a film JUST BEING released in
theaters and not available on DVD ANYWHERE in the world. I am sure ARL, PAT
& Michael will find a way to justify that as well. After it is part of
"educational" institution and sponsored by faculty.

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Schmitt, Mike  wrote:

> There seems to be this notion from faculty at my campus that they can take
> a program with copyright and place the entire movie on D2L or other online
> sources.  I don't believe a campus has the right to place an entire program
> online for students to watch at their convenience.  I don't believe the
> TEACH Act or Fair Use cover this type of situation.  If someone can point
> to a particular piece of copyright law that would illustrate this that
> would be helpful.
>
> Does anyone have specific examples of campuses be targeted/fined for
> copyright infringement?
>
> I would appreciate any assistance you can provide.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike Schmitt
> UW-Green Bay
>
> 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] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

[ghandman]

Enough Jessica. This simply is not a productive response.

We need to move on for the moment.

Gary



> You missed the memo Mike. You can copy and stream any film or book ever
> made or published so long as a professor tells you he needs it. ARL etc
> have said so and you longer have to worry about actual copyright law or
> numerous legal cases that say otherwise.
>
> I am in an especially snarky mood today. I just found a major academic
> institution has
> "scheduled" an open campus showing of a film JUST BEING released in
> theaters and not available on DVD ANYWHERE in the world. I am sure ARL,
> PAT
> & Michael will find a way to justify that as well. After it is part of
> "educational" institution and sponsored by faculty.
>
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Schmitt, Mike  wrote:
>
>> There seems to be this notion from faculty at my campus that they can
>> take
>> a program with copyright and place the entire movie on D2L or other
>> online
>> sources.  I don't believe a campus has the right to place an entire
>> program
>> online for students to watch at their convenience.  I don't believe the
>> TEACH Act or Fair Use cover this type of situation.  If someone can
>> point
>> to a particular piece of copyright law that would illustrate this that
>> would be helpful.
>>
>> Does anyone have specific examples of campuses be targeted/fined for
>> copyright infringement?
>>
>> I would appreciate any assistance you can provide.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Mike Schmitt
>> UW-Green Bay
>>
>> 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.
>


Gary Handman
Director
Media Resources Center
Moffitt Library
UC Berkeley

510-643-8566
ghand...@library.berkeley.edu
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC

"I have always preferred the reflection of life to life itself."
--Francois Truffaut


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] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

[Jessica Rosner]

Not going to happen Gary. That was indeed a sarcastic response but when
people continue to write things and deliberately and systematically
misstate copyright law ( some things are open to interpretation, others are
not) I will respond ( I certainly do not need Mike) In a matter of weeks we
have seen a chunk of the library establishment condone a level of copyright
infringement that is staggering and they have largely focused it on media
rather than books. I still don't see ARL suggesting you can scan and stream
books for a course and about the only response I get when I actually quote
case law and literal factual errors is
"This exact issue has never been decided" or that I am paranoid. There is
again a clear and unambiguous case law in from two Federal appeals courts
stating that while the exact portion of fair use is debatable the copying
of significant portions of written works is a a violation of "Fair Use". At
no time in the nearly 20 years since the first case was decided did an
institution or group claim that because the cases involved "for profit"
entities  "non profit" entities could in fact use more let alone all of a
work. In addition there is a case from the 80s in which a consortium of
schools copied and distributed entire films and TV programs and they were
completely bitched slapped down because despite the fact they were non
profit they could NOT copy and use whole films in classes both because it
violated the amount that could be used under fair use and it directly
effected the profits of rights holders. Why exactly is this never
mentioned? I am still waiting for anyone supporting the code or similar
views to explain upon one legal basis they now believe they can copy and
stream whole films. As noted in my previous email I remain beyond startled
even  by my standards that Pat would suggest as source for copyright a site
which literally eliminates the issue of loss of revenue for a rights holder
from the debate,basically telling anyone relying on their site that it is
not part of copyright law.

I get that I rant but I still await specific answers to questions I have
posed and will again post the key wording in the Kinko's case
and ask upon what legal basis would this not apply to non for profit
institutions.

"The mere fact that the portions copied by Kinko’s were those that the college
professor singled out as being critical parts
of the books demonstrates that even if not “the heart of” the works
in question, the parts copied were substantial in quality. Thus,
with regard to this factor, the court finds for the publishers
because Kinko’s is copying substantial portions of the work"



On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 2:30 PM,  wrote:

> Enough Jessica. This simply is not a productive response.
>
> We need to move on for the moment.
>
> Gary
>
>
>
> > You missed the memo Mike. You can copy and stream any film or book ever
> > made or published so long as a professor tells you he needs it. ARL etc
> > have said so and you longer have to worry about actual copyright law or
> > numerous legal cases that say otherwise.
> >
> > I am in an especially snarky mood today. I just found a major academic
> > institution has
> > "scheduled" an open campus showing of a film JUST BEING released in
> > theaters and not available on DVD ANYWHERE in the world. I am sure ARL,
> > PAT
> > & Michael will find a way to justify that as well. After it is part of
> > "educational" institution and sponsored by faculty.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Schmitt, Mike 
> wrote:
> >
> >> There seems to be this notion from faculty at my campus that they can
> >> take
> >> a program with copyright and place the entire movie on D2L or other
> >> online
> >> sources.  I don't believe a campus has the right to place an entire
> >> program
> >> online for students to watch at their convenience.  I don't believe the
> >> TEACH Act or Fair Use cover this type of situation.  If someone can
> >> point
> >> to a particular piece of copyright law that would illustrate this that
> >> would be helpful.
> >>
> >> Does anyone have specific examples of campuses be targeted/fined for
> >> copyright infringement?
> >>
> >> I would appreciate any assistance you can provide.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Mike Schmitt
> >> UW-Green Bay
> >>
> >> 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 

Re: [Videolib] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

[Brewer, Michael]

Jessica,

You put my name in here and then followed up by implying that I've deliberately 
and systematically misstated copyright law (you only mentioned me, Pat and ARL, 
so I am assuming that the "people" below also refers to me).  I don't believe 
I've misstated anything.  If anything, I've tried to simply point out your 
misstatements and overgeneralizations by referring directly to the law.  Please 
point out where you feel I've made misstatements and I'll gladly retract them 
if they are, in fact, misstatements. It would be refreshing if you'd agree to 
do the same.

mb

Michael Brewer
Team Leader for Instructional Services
University of Arizona Libraries
brew...@u.library.arizona.edu

From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu 
[mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Jessica Rosner
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 1:09 PM
To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

Not going to happen Gary. That was indeed a sarcastic response but when people 
continue to write things and deliberately and systematically misstate copyright 
law ( some things are open to interpretation, others are not) I will respond ( 
I certainly do not need Mike) In a matter of weeks we have seen a chunk of the 
library establishment condone a level of copyright infringement that is 
staggering and they have largely focused it on media rather than books. I still 
don't see ARL suggesting you can scan and stream books for a course and about 
the only response I get when I actually quote case law and literal factual 
errors is
"This exact issue has never been decided" or that I am paranoid. There is again 
a clear and unambiguous case law in from two Federal appeals courts stating 
that while the exact portion of fair use is debatable the copying of 
significant portions of written works is a a violation of "Fair Use". At no 
time in the nearly 20 years since the first case was decided did an institution 
or group claim that because the cases involved "for profit" entities  "non 
profit" entities could in fact use more let alone all of a work. In addition 
there is a case from the 80s in which a consortium of schools copied and 
distributed entire films and TV programs and they were completely bitched 
slapped down because despite the fact they were non profit they could NOT copy 
and use whole films in classes both because it violated the amount that could 
be used under fair use and it directly effected the profits of rights holders. 
Why exactly is this never mentioned? I am still waiting for anyone supporting 
the code or similar views to explain upon one legal basis they now believe they 
can copy and stream whole films. As noted in my previous email I remain beyond 
startled even  by my standards that Pat would suggest as source for copyright a 
site which literally eliminates the issue of loss of revenue for a rights 
holder from the debate,basically telling anyone relying on their site that it 
is not part of copyright law.

I get that I rant but I still await specific answers to questions I have posed 
and will again post the key wording in the Kinko's case
and ask upon what legal basis would this not apply to non for profit 
institutions.

"The mere fact that the portions copied by Kinko's were those that the college 
professor singled out as being critical parts
of the books demonstrates that even if not "the heart of" the works in 
question, the parts copied were substantial in quality. Thus, with regard to 
this factor, the court finds for the publishers because Kinko's is copying 
substantial portions of the work"



On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 2:30 PM, 
mailto:ghand...@library.berkeley.edu>> wrote:
Enough Jessica. This simply is not a productive response.

We need to move on for the moment.

Gary



> You missed the memo Mike. You can copy and stream any film or book ever
> made or published so long as a professor tells you he needs it. ARL etc
> have said so and you longer have to worry about actual copyright law or
> numerous legal cases that say otherwise.
>
> I am in an especially snarky mood today. I just found a major academic
> institution has
> "scheduled" an open campus showing of a film JUST BEING released in
> theaters and not available on DVD ANYWHERE in the world. I am sure ARL,
> PAT
> & Michael will find a way to justify that as well. After it is part of
> "educational" institution and sponsored by faculty.
>
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Schmitt, Mike 
> mailto:schmi...@uwgb.edu>> wrote:
>
>> There seems to be this notion from faculty at my campus that they can
>> take
>> a program with copyright and place the entire movie on D2L or other
>> online
>> sources.  I don't believe a campus has the right to place an entire
>> program
>> online for students to watch at their convenience.  I don't believe the
>> TEACH Act or Fair Use cover this type of situation.  If someone can
>> point
>> to a partic

Re: [Videolib] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

[ghandman]

Take your questions to ARL, Jessica.  Or take them to Pat Aufderheide and
her group.  Most of us were not involved in developing the recent
guidelines. Furthermore, most of us have very little control over what
goes on in the broader administration of institutions in which we work
(many times despite concerted efforts to work with administrators and
faculty on significant intellectual property issues).

It is positively not productive to endlessly spar on this list.


While I think continuing civil discourse about these issues is definitely
in order and welcomed, this list is in danger of becoming one endless
copyright and fair use slug-fest.  I've received a number of off-list
notes of concern about this and, more disconcertingly, I notice a definite
increase in the number of unsubscribe requests lately. As moderator (and
originator) of the list, I really can't allow that to happen.  There's
much too much other work, and too many other issues to tackle.

The issues we've been batting around will eventually be settled by case
law, or by the testing and defining of fair use applications in other
legal arenas.  It is clear to me that the various sides of these issues
have been more than thoroughly aired, and, at this point, unless there are
really sage and unique insights to be had, all we're doing is spinning
wheels.

Again, unless I hear from members of this list that they have an
overriding need to hear these issues and complaints beaten to a bloody
pulp,  we need to move on, and I need to make that happen one way or the
other.

Gary



> Not going to happen Gary. That was indeed a sarcastic response but when
> people continue to write things and deliberately and systematically
> misstate copyright law ( some things are open to interpretation, others
> are
> not) I will respond ( I certainly do not need Mike) In a matter of weeks
> we
> have seen a chunk of the library establishment condone a level of
> copyright
> infringement that is staggering and they have largely focused it on media
> rather than books. I still don't see ARL suggesting you can scan and
> stream
> books for a course and about the only response I get when I actually quote
> case law and literal factual errors is
> "This exact issue has never been decided" or that I am paranoid. There is
> again a clear and unambiguous case law in from two Federal appeals courts
> stating that while the exact portion of fair use is debatable the copying
> of significant portions of written works is a a violation of "Fair Use".
> At
> no time in the nearly 20 years since the first case was decided did an
> institution or group claim that because the cases involved "for profit"
> entities  "non profit" entities could in fact use more let alone all of a
> work. In addition there is a case from the 80s in which a consortium of
> schools copied and distributed entire films and TV programs and they were
> completely bitched slapped down because despite the fact they were non
> profit they could NOT copy and use whole films in classes both because it
> violated the amount that could be used under fair use and it directly
> effected the profits of rights holders. Why exactly is this never
> mentioned? I am still waiting for anyone supporting the code or similar
> views to explain upon one legal basis they now believe they can copy and
> stream whole films. As noted in my previous email I remain beyond startled
> even  by my standards that Pat would suggest as source for copyright a
> site
> which literally eliminates the issue of loss of revenue for a rights
> holder
> from the debate,basically telling anyone relying on their site that it is
> not part of copyright law.
>
> I get that I rant but I still await specific answers to questions I have
> posed and will again post the key wording in the Kinko's case
> and ask upon what legal basis would this not apply to non for profit
> institutions.
>
> "The mere fact that the portions copied by Kinko’s were those that the
> college
> professor singled out as being critical parts
> of the books demonstrates that even if not “the heart of” the works
> in question, the parts copied were substantial in quality. Thus,
> with regard to this factor, the court finds for the publishers
> because Kinko’s is copying substantial portions of the work"
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 2:30 PM,  wrote:
>
>> Enough Jessica. This simply is not a productive response.
>>
>> We need to move on for the moment.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>
>> > You missed the memo Mike. You can copy and stream any film or book
>> ever
>> > made or published so long as a professor tells you he needs it. ARL
>> etc
>> > have said so and you longer have to worry about actual copyright law
>> or
>> > numerous legal cases that say otherwise.
>> >
>> > I am in an especially snarky mood today. I just found a major academic
>> > institution has
>> > "scheduled" an open campus showing of a film JUST BEING released in
>> > theaters and not available on DVD ANYWHERE in the w

Re: [Videolib] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

[Jessica Rosner]

I have tried Gary. I have repeatedly asked her questions on this list and
all she does in response is post links to sites like the one that boiled
the "4 factors" down to two (eliminating the one about financial damage to
rights holders, Sorry but that one is just breathtaking) She never directly
answered any of questions.

Gary this is our life blood and as long as the question comes up here I am
likely to respond to it. We were specifically discussing the ARL Code etc.
Do you think they would in fact respond to me? Since they never solicited
input from rights holders or filmmakers when they put them together? I
doubt it. However the main thing is that there have been some very specific
misstatements of copyright law FACTS here and again those I would
definitely respond to.

I do have an idea. How bout Pat or someone else ask ARL council or someone
similar to do a real time Q&A online. That might make things a lot clearer.

Gary I know you are in fact one of the good guys but if someone
administrator came into your library and said we have decided we can copy
and stream all the films both in the library and any ones we need in the
future so your services are no longer required would you not bother to
respond? That is the equivalent of what you are asking here.

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 3:57 PM,  wrote:

> Take your questions to ARL, Jessica.  Or take them to Pat Aufderheide and
> her group.  Most of us were not involved in developing the recent
> guidelines. Furthermore, most of us have very little control over what
> goes on in the broader administration of institutions in which we work
> (many times despite concerted efforts to work with administrators and
> faculty on significant intellectual property issues).
>
> It is positively not productive to endlessly spar on this list.
>
>
> While I think continuing civil discourse about these issues is definitely
> in order and welcomed, this list is in danger of becoming one endless
> copyright and fair use slug-fest.  I've received a number of off-list
> notes of concern about this and, more disconcertingly, I notice a definite
> increase in the number of unsubscribe requests lately. As moderator (and
> originator) of the list, I really can't allow that to happen.  There's
> much too much other work, and too many other issues to tackle.
>
> The issues we've been batting around will eventually be settled by case
> law, or by the testing and defining of fair use applications in other
> legal arenas.  It is clear to me that the various sides of these issues
> have been more than thoroughly aired, and, at this point, unless there are
> really sage and unique insights to be had, all we're doing is spinning
> wheels.
>
> Again, unless I hear from members of this list that they have an
> overriding need to hear these issues and complaints beaten to a bloody
> pulp,  we need to move on, and I need to make that happen one way or the
> other.
>
> Gary
>
>
>
> > Not going to happen Gary. That was indeed a sarcastic response but when
> > people continue to write things and deliberately and systematically
> > misstate copyright law ( some things are open to interpretation, others
> > are
> > not) I will respond ( I certainly do not need Mike) In a matter of weeks
> > we
> > have seen a chunk of the library establishment condone a level of
> > copyright
> > infringement that is staggering and they have largely focused it on media
> > rather than books. I still don't see ARL suggesting you can scan and
> > stream
> > books for a course and about the only response I get when I actually
> quote
> > case law and literal factual errors is
> > "This exact issue has never been decided" or that I am paranoid. There is
> > again a clear and unambiguous case law in from two Federal appeals courts
> > stating that while the exact portion of fair use is debatable the copying
> > of significant portions of written works is a a violation of "Fair Use".
> > At
> > no time in the nearly 20 years since the first case was decided did an
> > institution or group claim that because the cases involved "for profit"
> > entities  "non profit" entities could in fact use more let alone all of a
> > work. In addition there is a case from the 80s in which a consortium of
> > schools copied and distributed entire films and TV programs and they were
> > completely bitched slapped down because despite the fact they were non
> > profit they could NOT copy and use whole films in classes both because it
> > violated the amount that could be used under fair use and it directly
> > effected the profits of rights holders. Why exactly is this never
> > mentioned? I am still waiting for anyone supporting the code or similar
> > views to explain upon one legal basis they now believe they can copy and
> > stream whole films. As noted in my previous email I remain beyond
> startled
> > even  by my standards that Pat would suggest as source for copyright a
> > site
> > which literally eliminates the issue of loss 

[Videolib] All Region DVDs

[Tatar, Becky]

Hi, all

We've finally found the DVD Tomorrow When the World Began.  It's available on 
Amazon as an All Region DVD.  My question is - are there any problems with 
playing these on our DVD players?  People won't come up and complain that the 
disc won't play?  (a complaint heard very often!)  Thanks

Becky Tatar
Periodicals/Audiovisuals
Aurora Public Library
1 E. Benton Street
Aurora, IL   60505
Phone: 630-264-4100
FAX: 630-896-3209
blt...@aurora.lib.il.us
www.aurorapubliclibrary.org




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] The Video History of Our Times VHS set: 1929-1967

[Patricia Ruocco]

Hello,

I have until now, been able to justify keeping this set (at least in our
storage area) because it is such a unique resource, and because the
filmmakers have told me they are not going to produce it as a DVD set. Each
video provide a look at key events in each year that have shaped (U.S.)
history. I'm not sure if some of the footage on these tapes is available
anywhere else. I'm hoping that one of you will want this set and be willing
to pay for the shipping. It'd be a great addition to a history collection.
If you are interested, you can contact me off-list and we can talk about
this further.

Patti

-- 
*Patricia Ruocco*

Adult Services
Lisle Library District
630-971-1675 x1503
ruoc...@lislelibrary.org
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] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners

[Jessica Rosner]

Michael
Feel free to correct me if I am misstating this but I recall you were the
first person (prior to the "code") to say that since there had never been
an exact case that said you could not stream an entire film than perhaps
you could. You may see that as an academic exorcise but it is a reality for
me and as I have posted there is in fact a whole lot of case law related to
this which is simply being glossed over and ignored. Again the Kinko's case
followed directly by the Michigan documents  case were unequivocal that you
could not copy large chunks of copyrighted material merely because they
were for educational use. It has been more or less black letter copyright
law that you may only use portions of works to create new works (
Transformative). They Britannica case made it clear that even if the people
doing the copying were non profit institutions they could NOT copy and use
entire works. The only case that challenged this was SONY involved
individuals "time shifting " for private use and every case I cited
happened AFTER Sony so it was no defense. The claim that "fair use" can
legitimately cover copying and streaming and entire work is not a
speculative idea but is happening every day and again PLEASE correct if i
am wrong but you seem to believe that it is acceptable because the law is
somehow vague on this.

I realize I am the designated "ranter" here but I don't think I can
overstate how personally  distributors and filmmakers feel betrayed by
people they believed supported them. I am NOT referring to most people here
but to basically say there really isn't anything we can do about it and you
(me) should not writing about it is not an answer. Per my previous response
to Gary if someone came in and told you they were doing to take every item
in the library, digitize and stream it so the library and you  would no
longer be necessary I suspect you might be ranting too.

PS sorry this was lost in my draft box for the day by mistake.

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Brewer, Michael <
brew...@u.library.arizona.edu> wrote:

>  Jessica, 
>
> ** **
>
> You put my name in here and then followed up by implying that I’ve
> deliberately and systematically misstated copyright law (you only mentioned
> me, Pat and ARL, so I am assuming that the “people” below also refers to
> me).  I don’t believe I’ve misstated anything.  If anything, I’ve tried to
> simply point out your misstatements and overgeneralizations by referring
> directly to the law.  Please point out where you feel I’ve made
> misstatements and I’ll gladly retract them if they are, in fact,
> misstatements. It would be refreshing if you’d agree to do the same.
>
> ** **
>
> mb
>
> ** **
>
> Michael Brewer
>
> Team Leader for Instructional Services
>
> University of Arizona Libraries
>
> brew...@u.library.arizona.edu
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:
> videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] *On Behalf Of *Jessica Rosner
> *Sent:* Monday, February 27, 2012 1:09 PM
> *To:* videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [Videolib] Copyright Issues for D2L/Online Learners
>
> ** **
>
> Not going to happen Gary. That was indeed a sarcastic response but when
> people continue to write things and deliberately and systematically
> misstate copyright law ( some things are open to interpretation, others are
> not) I will respond ( I certainly do not need Mike) In a matter of weeks we
> have seen a chunk of the library establishment condone a level of copyright
> infringement that is staggering and they have largely focused it on media
> rather than books. I still don't see ARL suggesting you can scan and stream
> books for a course and about the only response I get when I actually quote
> case law and literal factual errors is
>
> "This exact issue has never been decided" or that I am paranoid. There is
> again a clear and unambiguous case law in from two Federal appeals courts
> stating that while the exact portion of fair use is debatable the copying
> of significant portions of written works is a a violation of "Fair Use". At
> no time in the nearly 20 years since the first case was decided did an
> institution or group claim that because the cases involved "for profit"
> entities  "non profit" entities could in fact use more let alone all of a
> work. In addition there is a case from the 80s in which a consortium of
> schools copied and distributed entire films and TV programs and they were
> completely bitched slapped down because despite the fact they were non
> profit they could NOT copy and use whole films in classes both because it
> violated the amount that could be used under fair use and it directly
> effected the profits of rights holders. Why exactly is this never
> mentioned? I am still waiting for anyone supporting the code or similar
> views to explain upon one legal basis they now believe they can copy and
> stream whole films. As noted in my previous email I remain beyond s