Archive for March, 2006
Here’s some developing news on the copyright front that libraries might find of interest:
In response to Google’s mass digitization project, Harper Collins issued a press release in December 2005 announcing their plans to digitize and make available their own content (a backlist of about 20,000 titles). Eriq Gardner’s recent article, “Online Disputes Expose Publishers’ Copyright Vulnerability,†on law.com reports that Harper Collins may face opposition from its own authors on this project, who believe that the publisher may not own the electronic rights to their works. As Gardner reports, some authors have requested that the publisher revert their copyrights back to them and not include their works in the proposed digital archive.
Some publishers’ contracts include clauses allowing copyright to revert back to the author if a book is declared “out of print†by the publisher and if the author requests a reversion of his or her rights. But, if the publisher digitizes a book, the publisher might claim that the digitized book never goes “out of print†and that therefore the rights will never revert to the author. Also, as Denise Troll Covey points out in her study of copyright permissions for digitization projects, the possibility of “print on demand†may effectively prevent a book from ever going out of print (and therefore never reverting to the author).
I’ll be interested to see what Harper Collins does next. Stay tuned!
March 22nd, 2006
We’re offering a free web seminar – a webinar – on March 29, 2006, on Google Scholar’s Library Links service. See our News and Announcements page for more info.
I’m excited about this for a couple reasons. First, this is the first time I’ve tried out WebEx to present an online webinar. If the technology works well, I hope to use it for future MLC seminars. It looks like an effective method to deliver programs to our members’ desktops.
Secondly, I’m thrilled that a rep from Google has agreed to participate online in our webinar. It will be great to have a true expert online to answer our member libraries’ questions. There is a lot of potential in Google Scholar’s Library Links — especially since many students already begin their searches with Google.
I hope you can join us for the program! Please feel free to contact me if you have questions or comments.
March 6th, 2006
There is hope on the horizon for amendments to copyright law to improve library access to digital materials! The Library of Congress has convened a Section 108 Study Group to review how current library and archival copyright law exceptions and limitations need to be amended, especially in light of changes due to widespread use of digital technologies.
The Section 108 Study Group will host two Public Roundtables on March 8 and March 16 to gather input on four topics related to section 108 of the copyright law. Section 108 is the section of copyright law that provides libraries and archives with specific exceptions to copyright holders’ exclusive rights.
The four topics to be addressed include:
1. Eligibility for section 108 exceptions.
2. Proposal to amend section 108(b) and 108(c) to allow access outside the premises in limited circumstances.
3. Proposal for a new exception for preservation-only restricted access copying.
4. Proposal for a new exception for the preservation of websites.
If you would like to comment on the four topics, you may submit your comments electronically by emailing your comments to Mary Rasenberger, Policy Advisor for Special Programs, U.S. Copyright Office, at: section108@loc.gov. Comments will be accepted between March 17 and April 17, 2006. For instructions on how to submit written comments, and for details on the four topics, see the Background Paper (PDF).
March 3rd, 2006
A U.S. District Court has awarded Perfect 10 a preliminary injunction against Google to prevent copying and displaying of Perfect 10’s images as thumbnail images in Google Image Search.
The opinion noted that the case arose out of “the increasingly recurring conflict between intellectual property rights on the one hand and the dazzling capacity of internet technology to assemble, organize, store, access, and display intellectual “content†on the other hand.â€Â The question before the court was, “does a search engine infringe on copyrighted images when it displays them on an “image search†function in the form of “thumbnails†but not infringe when, through in-line linking, it displays copyrighted images served by another website?â€
Perfect 10 operates a subscription web site of nude photographs and generates its revenue through the sale of its copyrighted photographs. Some of Perfect 10’s subscribers have pirated copies of the photographs and have mounted them on their own web sites. The preliminary injunction prevents Google from copying and displaying thumbnail images of Perfect 10’s copyrighted works. The Court did not award an injunction against in-line linking to Perfect 10’s images on other web sites.
March 3rd, 2006
The Copyright Office has completed its study of problems related to “orphan worksâ€â€”copyrighted works whose owners may be impossible to identify and locate. The report is available in PDF in two versions: the full report with appendices or the main text without appendices.
If this report results in changes to the copyright law, we could see positive implications for library digitization projects. One of the major barriers to digitizing special collections (besides the lack of funds!) is the problem of identifying and locating copyright holders of orphan works.
For a good explanation of the need for legislation on orphan works, see the comments of Brian Schottlaender, University Librarian at University of California, San Diego. Mr. Schottlaender makes a good case for the need for libraries to make rare or unique collections available online by using the Scripps Institution of Oceanography Archives as an example.
March 3rd, 2006
