On January 8, 2014, the Library Copyright Alliance (LCA), of which ARL is a member, provided these additional comments on a number of issues raised in the recent US Department of Commerce “green paper” on Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Digital Economy. These comments focus on four issues: the recent fair use court decision in the case Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens, digital preservation, remixes, and collective rights organizations.
ARL joined 28 other organizations and 71 individuals in a letter opposing a copyright term of life plus 70 years in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP). Authors of the letter, sent to TPP negotiators on December 6, 2013, noted, “There is no benefit to society of extending copyright beyond the 50 years mandated by the WTO. While some TPP countries, like the United States, Mexico, Peru, Chile, Singapore or Australia, already have life + 70 (or longer) copyright terms, there is growing recognition that such terms were a mistake, and should be shortened, or modified by requiring formalities for the extended periods.”
On November 13, 2013, the Library Copyright Alliance (LCA), of which ARL is a member, provided these comments on a number of issues raised in the recent US Department of Commerce “green paper” on Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Digital Economy. LCA commented on issues relating to statutory damages, online licensing, collective rights organizations, and contractual restrictions on copyright exceptions.
Court transcript from Herbert Mitgang, et al., v. Google, Inc. September 23, 2013, hearing before Judge Denny Chin in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.
SPEC Kit 336 explores research libraries’ participation in institutional efforts to train faculty, staff, students, and other researchers in the principles of responsible conduct of research (RCR) and ethical research practices. The survey includes questions on the institution’s training activities, on training roles currently undertaken by librarians, and on librarians’ willingness to expand instruction into the arena of responsible conduct of research. The SPEC Kit includes examples of RCR websites, citation management guides, and RCR workshop and tutorial materials, and information about academic integrity and plagiarism, using copyrighted materials, data management, and research animal welfare.
This publication is available for purchase in both print and online versions. Download the spec-kit-purchase-options-2013.pdf for complete pricing and purchase options information.
Link to the online SPEC Kit 336 on the ARL Digital Publications website.
This infographic by ARL, American University's (AU) Washington College of Law, and AU's School of Communication shows how and why libraries should use the Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries.
Jonathan Band and Deborah Goldman provide examples of statutory limitations on contractual waivers of rights. These examples come from the US Code; the New York and California Codes; uniform acts; and the European Union. They provide ample precedent for Congress to adopt restrictions on the enforcement of contractual terms that attempt to limit exceptions to the Copyright Act such as first sale or fair use.
The ARL Joint Task Force on Services to Patrons with Print Disabilities released this report to bring much-needed attention to the challenges of print-disabled individuals who are seeking access to both print and digital library products and services. The report contains recommendations for research libraries to make information accessible to their full range of diverse users equitably. ARL believes that research libraries are poised to provide critical direction—along with academic leadership, IT, and disability services—on the service and technology planning, procurement, and licensing necessary to create a fully accessible information environment.
RLI issue 281 includes:
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) decided not to participate in the appeal of the case Cambridge University Press v. Mark Becker as amicus curiae. The case concerns the use at Georgia State University (GSU) of electronic course reserves (e-reserves) and electronic course sites to make excerpts from academic books available online to students enrolled in particular courses. It was widely reported that the US Copyright Office requested that the DOJ file an amicus brief either on the side of the publishers or as a neutral party. On February 22, 2013, the DOJ sent this letter to the court stating that the US Attorney General had decided not to file an amicus brief in the case.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is evaluating whether to participate in the appeal of the case Cambridge University Press v. Mark Becker as amicus curiae. The case concerns the use at Georgia State University (GSU) of electronic course reserves (e-reserves) and electronic course sites to make excerpts from academic books available online to students enrolled in particular courses. It was widely reported that the US Copyright Office requested that the DOJ file an amicus brief either on the side of the publishers or as a neutral party. On January 25, 2013, the DOJ requested an extension of the time they have to file an amicus brief.