jessica, not sure if you responded to me, but if so, i think we are
all talking about works "protected" by copyright law, right? the
public domain is where things "should" end up after a short time, only
because those dudes who wrote the constitution thought so. my point
was/is that copyright is not about metaphors of "property" but rather
about metaphors of "use." (for the public good). we might not like
that means/ends argument, but it is there, no matter how many
particular cases we bring up and examine.
troy
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Jessica Rosner
<jessicapros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fair enough but we are not talking about public domain material but
> how to use material still fully protected by copyright laws.
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Troy Davis <mtd...@wm.edu> wrote:
>> this is completely fascinating discussion, and i'm glad we are having
>> it. while we can "tweak" the regime of particular uses of works (after
>> all, we must), i'm gonna go high road, and I think this is the spirit
>> of the ARL guidelines: Copyright is rooted in the Constitutional aim
>> to promote learning, protect the public domain, and insure the right
>> of the broadest public access to information.
>>
>> Some reflection on the Constitutional premise of copyright leads one
>> (or at least, me) to see that the means of copyright (the securing of
>> exclusive rights to authors for a limited time) are designed to
>> support the ends of copyright (the promotion of learning). The
>> copyright clause does not grant ownership of works, rather it simply
>> grants ownership of rights, “exclusive rights” for a limited time.
>>
>> Troy
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Chris Lewis <cle...@american.edu> wrote:
>>> I also think it makes a difference vis a vis fair use if a video is
>>> streaming and copy-protected and can only be viewed during a short
>>> period whereas a book could be easily copied and kept indefinitely.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 9:31 PM, jwoo <j...@cca.edu> wrote:
>>>> No, that logic doesn't follow: literature classes read Catcher in the Rye
>>>> etc. as the literary work it was intended to be when published. However,
>>>> if one were doing linguistic analysis of Catcher in the Rye, then it would
>>>> be fair use to digitize and use that text for computational purposes.
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 6, 2012, at 5:36 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Wow just Wow that is one the craziest things I have heard but not
>>>>> surprised. So I assume by the same "logic' most written works from
>>>>> Catcher in the Rye to Conspiracy of Dunces can be scanned and posted
>>>>> on line for classes since after all they were written for
>>>>> entertainment.
>>>>>
>>>>> And you people wonder why I don't trust the "lawyers" working on this.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:07 PM, jwoo <j...@cca.edu> wrote:
>>>>>> Feature films seem to be a particularly controversial area, because if I
>>>>>> understood Peter Jaszi correctly when he responded to questions about
>>>>>> the Best Practices today: to use a film that was originally marketed for
>>>>>> entertaininment purposes for educational purposes would be a
>>>>>> transformative use. Page 8-9 talk about legal precedents for this, but
>>>>>> it's not very detailed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To me this seems to fly in the face of Fair Use factor 4 because feature
>>>>>> films tend to be readily accessible for loan, rent, or purchase at
>>>>>> reasonable prices. But I can see how it would apply to videos priced at
>>>>>> institutional tiered rates because what student or instructor is going
>>>>>> to shell out $250 to watch a film as part of a class assignment? If
>>>>>> streamed, it's not going to affect sales anyway. But if a video were
>>>>>> only marketed as educational, then Peter Jaszi's transformative use
>>>>>> wouldn't come into play, though a high price could make it fair under
>>>>>> factor 4.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This doesn't apply to most books because students have been enculturated
>>>>>> to pay for expensive text books, which is why it wouldn't be fair to
>>>>>> scan an entire book and post it online under factor 4.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> that's my two cents anyway
>>>>>> Janice Woo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 6, 2012, at 12:50 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am afraid the focus on feature films is my fault Bob. I will be
>>>>>>> honest, I focus on features because to me it makes it even clearer
>>>>>>> that the people pushing the "best practices" and other similar views
>>>>>>> on "fair use" (and that there is no limit to amount you can use) often
>>>>>>> want to justify streaming of entire films without any regard to
>>>>>>> rights and use. The term "educational " film really does not have any
>>>>>>> legal meaning however in the case of the TEACH ACT ( which I believe
>>>>>>> is the only area where this applies) films made exclusively for
>>>>>>> instruction are an exempt class but then so are all fiction films. In
>>>>>>> terms of the financial damage one could argue that the streaming a
>>>>>>> more costly "educational" film might be more damaging than a standard
>>>>>>> feature film, but I rather doubt it. The core issue remains the claim
>>>>>>> that in essence "fair use" is whatever the institution decides it is
>>>>>>> and that any use they accept is "tranformative" .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Bob Norris <b...@filmideas.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> This may seem like a naive question, but is all the focus on theatrical
>>>>>>>> because it is assumed that a program from an educational distributor
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> not qualify under fair use because of the adverse affect upon the
>>>>>>>> potential
>>>>>>>> market for or value of the copyrighted work? And if this is true,
>>>>>>>> would that
>>>>>>>> extend to segments of a program if the distributors sells digital
>>>>>>>> segments
>>>>>>>> of the program?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think Film Ideas would be willing to agree its license agreements
>>>>>>>> shall
>>>>>>>> not supersede the rights already granted to users under copyright law.
>>>>>>>> Although, if we cannot agree on what the law states, I'm not sure how
>>>>>>>> much
>>>>>>>> weight that statement carries.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bob Norris
>>>>>>>> Managing Director
>>>>>>>> Film Ideas, Inc.
>>>>>>>> Phone: (847) 419-0255
>>>>>>>> Email: b...@filmideas.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Feb 6, 2012, at 1:16 PM, videolib-requ...@lists.berkeley.edu wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> From: "Simpkins, Terry W." <tsimp...@middlebury.edu>
>>>>>>>> Date: February 6, 2012 12:41:16 PM CST
>>>>>>>> To: "videolib@lists.berkeley.edu" <videolib@lists.berkeley.edu>
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Videolib] ACRL Best Practices
>>>>>>>> Reply-To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>>>>> Jessica Rosner asks "If you ... are sincere that you are not the enemy
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> content owners, how bout a simple and CLEAR statement that "fair use'
>>>>>>>> does
>>>>>>>> NOT cover the use of feature material being assigned to classes."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am not one of the authors of the guidelines, but I can imagine that
>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>> reason they might be uncomfortable with such a statement is because,
>>>>>>>> well,
>>>>>>>> it has no basis in the law. We all know the drill by heart, don't we?
>>>>>>>> Each
>>>>>>>> fair use decision includes a judgment about the nature of the use
>>>>>>>> (perhaps
>>>>>>>> "assigned to class," in a non-profit setting), the nature of the work
>>>>>>>> (perhaps "feature material"), the amount being used (perhaps the whole
>>>>>>>> film,
>>>>>>>> perhaps not), and the effect on the market (perhaps a large negative
>>>>>>>> effect,
>>>>>>>> perhaps it will stimulate interest and sales). The law deliberately
>>>>>>>> requires us to reflect on each of these aspects. It is not a mere
>>>>>>>> check-list that makes simplistic assertions about whether using one
>>>>>>>> highly-generalized type of material ("feature films") in another highly
>>>>>>>> generalized setting ("classes") is, or is not, fair use. Why on earth
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> librarians and educators (or any sane individual, for that matter)
>>>>>>>> voluntarily limit rights granted to us by law? If the law was
>>>>>>>> intended to
>>>>>>>> exempt "feature materials" from the fair use provisions in this
>>>>>>>> manner, I am
>>>>>>>> confident it would have been written to say that. Perhaps content
>>>>>>>> owners
>>>>>>>> might make a similarly "simple and clear statement" saying that license
>>>>>>>> agreements shall not under any circumstances supersede the rights
>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>> granted to users under the fair use, or any other, provision of the
>>>>>>>> copyright law, just to "prove" they are not the "enemy" of education.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The law as written does not protect those librarians, students,
>>>>>>>> faculty, or
>>>>>>>> administrators who seek to use fair use as a shield to avoid buying
>>>>>>>> sufficient licensed or legally acquired copies. I'm sure there are
>>>>>>>> folks
>>>>>>>> out there, possibly even on this list, who do that. There are
>>>>>>>> unethical
>>>>>>>> practitioners in every field - yes, including librarians, educators,
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> even media distributors - but the law already prohibits, for example,
>>>>>>>> showing a film in a public setting without permission just because
>>>>>>>> someone
>>>>>>>> wants to save on licensing fees.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Oh, and my understanding about books is that, when it comes to fair
>>>>>>>> use, the
>>>>>>>> same factors apply. As far as I know, there is no blanket legal
>>>>>>>> prohibition
>>>>>>>> on libraries scanning an entire book and posting it online. Using the
>>>>>>>> entire work, whether in the case of a film or a book, certainly and
>>>>>>>> appropriately makes satisfying the fair use test that much more
>>>>>>>> difficult.
>>>>>>>> But it does not automatically render it impossible, however much Ms.
>>>>>>>> Rosner
>>>>>>>> or anyone else would like it to be so.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Terry
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Terry Simpkins
>>>>>>>> Director, Research and Collection Services
>>>>>>>> Library & Information Services
>>>>>>>> Middlebury College, Middlebury, VT 05753
>>>>>>>> (802) 443-5045
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Chris Lewis
>>> Media Librarian
>>> American University Library
>>> 202.885.3257
>>>
>>> For latest Media Services News:
>>> Blog: http://aulibmedia.blogspot.com
>>> Facebook: http://tinyurl.com/76uk7vr
>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/aulibmedia
>>>
>>>
>>> Please think twice before printing this e-mail.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> M. Troy Davis | (757) 279-8871
>> Director, Swem Media Center
>> Earl Gregg Swem Library
>> The College of William & Mary
>> mtd...@wm.edu
>> ---------
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/swemmedia/
>> http://www.facebook.com/swemmedia
>> http://www.youtube.com/swemmedia
>>
>> 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.
--
M. Troy Davis | (757) 279-8871
Director, Swem Media Center
Earl Gregg Swem Library
The College of William & Mary
mtd...@wm.edu
---------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/swemmedia/
http://www.facebook.com/swemmedia
http://www.youtube.com/swemmedia
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.
