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.edu<mailto: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<mailto: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<tel:224-545-3897> (cell) > 212-627-1785<tel:212-627-1785> (land line) > jessicapros...@gmail.com<mailto: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 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.
