Letter from Library Copyright Alliance and others supporting the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act (PRO-IP Act) of 2007, H.R. 4279 with some changes.  lt-proipact-05mar08.pdf
Testimony of Prudence Adler on behalf of the Library Copyright Alliance (LCA). adler-testimony-fair-use-2005.pdf
There is long-standing interest in identifying orphan works, books that are subject to copyright but whose copyright holders cannot be identified or contacted. Orphan works comprise a significant percentage of ARL collections, and there is deep interest in making these works discoverable and more accessible. Recently, the University of Michigan announced the initiation of the Orphan Works Project. The focus of the project is on US digitized books held by HathiTrust, a partnership of major research institutions and libraries working to ensure that the cultural record is preserved and accessible long into the future.
resource_orphanworks_13sept11.pdf
Letter from library associations supporting the Family and Entertainment Copyright Act of 2005, S. 167. lt-s167-family-ent-copyright-act-02mar05.pdf
Brief of Amici Curiae American Library Association, Association of Research Libraries, Association of College and Research Libraries, The Organizations for Transformative Works and the Right to Write Fund in support of the defendants. amicus-salinger-03aug09.pdf
This statement is submitted on behalf of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in response to the request by the Library of Congress for comments in support of a study on the current state of recorded sound preservation in the United States. Sound recordings are a critically important part of our Nation's cultural and educational landscape. As a consequence, the scope of these collections within the ARL community is significant and diverse. Unfortunately, these collections are also in various stages of risk. lt-leggett-avmaterials-study-26jan07.pdf
Brief Amici Curiae of ALA and ARL. tasiniamici.pdf
In response to issues raised by initiatives such as the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP), in spring 2005 the U.S. Copyright Office and the Library of Congress convened the Section 108 Study Group. The Study Group is charged to investigate whether Section 108 of the Copyright Act, which grants exceptions to libraries and archives, should be updated to better address the use of digital technologies and networked-based resources. dig-preservation-study-response-09nov06.pdf
Amici submit this brief urging that this Court reverse the decision of the trial court (in Register.com v. Verio) which effectively prohibits the copying of facts from a publicly accessible website. Amici represent the interests of many sectors of the computer, software, Internet telecommunications, and information services industries, as well as users of digital information. amicus-revised-register-verio-01mar01.pdf
Does the approach of creating a code of best practices, anchored in professional practice, actually work to expand the utility of fair use? What has happened to others who used codes of best practices to gain access to their rights?
This topic is discussed at length in Aufderheide and Jaszi, Reclaiming Fair Use (University of Chicago Press, 2011), but some specific examples include:
Does your university offer intellectual property education to incoming students, or have an academic integrity policy that addresses copyright issues? These are important areas where librarians can be of service in offering balanced information about copyright and fair use.
The Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries suggests at various points that librarians consider the use of appropriate “technical protection measures” when making digitized materials available on-line, as a way of bolstering their fair use claims. Many libraries already employ such measures as a risk-management strategy.
When teachers bring Stacey, a librarian at a Midwestern private university, their course materials to upload on the university’s e-reserves system, she always checks to make sure that the course material has not been uploaded before—or at least, not in the last three years. If it’s fresh material, and it’s only a small fraction of the original work, she’s pretty sure that uploading it for the students to study could be considered a “fair use.” If it has been uploaded before, she tries to license the material, or have the professor find a substitute that the professor hasn’t used before. She knows that at some universities, e-reserves policies are more liberal, but her institution can’t afford a legal challenge, so she likes to err on the conservative side. After all, you can’t be too careful.
The Fifth Principle in the Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries is entitled "Reproducing material for use by disabled students, faculty, staff, and other appropriate users." It describes in some detail the circumstances in which making and providing copies of collection materials in formats that are accessible to persons with disabilities constitutes fair use, as well as certain limitations to which that general principle is subject.
|
|
