 |
 |
At U of California we took the approach that it was our duty to tell the users everything we knew about the materials that could be used to make a rights determination.[1] In part that was because often even the librarians and archivists did not have a clear answer about the rights. In part it was the issue that the library would have some liability for advising users wrongly. But the main part was that any Fair Use determination is circumstantial, and only the user would know the circumstances of their intended use. I feel strongly that provide information for the users: dates of creation, creators, and if there is some place for the user to go to ask permission. That's all in the metadata schema for copyrightMD [2]. kc [1] http://www.cdlib.org/groups/rmg/ [2] http://www.cdlib.org/groups/rmg/docs/copyrightMD.xsd Quoting Jimmy Ghaphery <[log in to unmask]>: > While the Capture and Release report [1] seems relevant it is a > little different to me than digitized collections published by > libraries. I think it is incumbent on libraries to state use > restrictions and copyright status on the collections they digitize. > I also think we need to be bold in exercising fair use and public > domain provisions. Copyright law is meant to cut both ways as a > protection for authors and as a public good. If we shy away from > this exercise at the risk of lawsuits, we potentially lose more than > just the ability to release any one specific collection. > > [1] http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2010/2010-05.pdf > > --Jimmy > > -- > Jimmy Ghaphery > Head, Library Information Systems > VCU Libraries > http://www.library.vcu.edu > -- > > On 1/5/2012 9:37 AM, LeVan,Ralph wrote: >> If I understand what you are asking, about what we tell our patrons >> about what they can do with our images... >> >> One of the most important principles of rights law (that I have learned >> in the past 4 years) is that it is not the librarians' responsibility to >> advise patrons on the law about what they can and cannot do with images. >> In fact, it is not advised that we do that at all. >> >> This was a shocker to me when Peter Hirtle reviewed the Capture and >> Release report. The less said the less the risk to the institution. >> >> Jen >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Erway,Ricky >> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 2:24 PM >> To: LeVan,Ralph; OPORS >> Subject: RE: institutional fair use policies for digitized image >> collections >> >> The Well-Intentioned Practice document! >> http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/rights/practice.pdf >> While focused on collections of unpublished works (which often have >> complex or unknowable rights status), a lot of it is good advice for any >> collection (and it has lots of backing and support, >> http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/rights/support.htm). >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: LeVan,Ralph >> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 11:03 AM >> To: OPORS >> Subject: FW: institutional fair use policies for digitized image >> collections >> >> I remember the report telling collecting institutions to go ahead and >> put their stuff online. But, what advice did we give them on their >> patrons' rights? >> >> Ralph >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of >> Derek Merleaux >> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 1:39 PM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: institutional fair use policies for digitized image collections >> >> I'm working with some folks at my institution to open up policy on >> fair use and online digital collections. Our counsel has made it clear >> that we'll see more success if we can point to examples from other >> large digital collections. A lot of surveying of copyright and TOS >> pages from many online collections has given me a good general idea >> what collection posters are telling their patrons about fair use, but >> I need some examples of what administrators are telling the collection >> posters about what they can and can't claim (esp. in regards to >> collections open to the world that may contain large numbers of orphan >> works). It does seem clear that many have decided that a >> low-resolution digital image of a collection item (even if that item >> might be in copyright) is ok w/in the spirit of fair use if it's >> clearly posted for educational purposes. I just need some >> documentation of that policy. >> >> What I'm hoping to find is documentation (internal or otherwise) that >> basically states, "we think it's legally ok (for fair use or other >> reasons) to post online a digitized image of a collection object even >> if there's a chance that object is under copyright protection." >> >> If there is any chance you could point me in the direction of such >> documentation or someone who would know how to locate it I would be >> much obliged. >> >> >> Derek Merleaux > -- Karen Coyle [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet