Re: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)

[David Goodman <dgoodman@Princeton.EDU>]

It is very definitely the position of this particular librarian. The unit
of scientific information is the journal article. Its function is the same
whether it's on paper or electronic media. The way it's used is also the
same: people photocopy or print the ones they want to read. The way it
reaches subscribers is the same: they or their institution subscribe, and
they can then copy or print the article. The way it reaches
non-subscribers should be the same: either they get a copy on ILL from a
library which does subscribe, or they use a document delivery service, or
they get a copy from a colleague who has access. If they use ILL they are
subject to the fair use provisions of copyright law, if they use a service
they pay a copyright fee, if they get it from a colleague they pay nothing
at all. The key difference between the two media of distribution is that
the electronic medium permits its accessibility elsewhere than the
library. This is very convenient for users in institutions that have
subscriptions. Not only do they not need to go to the library, but
printing is easier. In an organization with a fully developed internal
document delivery service, they may get a copy exactly the same way
regardless of the medium, and never know the difference.  Either medium
permits illegal use, even widespread illegal use: it is perfectly possible
to make hundreds of copies of a whole printed issue and distribute them.
It's a little easier electronically.

ILL is not something a publisher need be afraid of.  Examining the last
three years of interlibrary loans requested by this library. If we had
needed to pay copyright on all of the periodical articles, regardless of
age, it would have cost us $6,000 a year, at current CCC rates. We paid
about $600 in CCC fees, mostly in cases where we used document delivery
services.  It would have induced us to subscribe to exactly one
periodical.  Looking at last years data for all of the University ILL, to
pay CCC fees for all periodicals borrowed would have cost $24,000, and
induced us to purchase exactly one addition periodical. The usual annual
CCC paid is about $2000/year. Considering that we spend about $2.7 million
for scientific periodicals, that does not amount to much potential
revenue: just about 1%. Our probable response if we had to pay copyright
on all, is to buy a few titles less to pay for it, not to subscribe to
every possible periodical. I sometimes think that's what publishers really
want us to do.

David Goodman
Biology Librarian
and Co-chair, Electronic Journals Task force
Princeton University Library
Princeton, NJ 08544-0001
phone: 609-258-3235
fax: 609-258-2627
e-mail: dgoodman@princeton.edu

______________

Anthony Watkinson wrote:
> 
> It seems to me that Scott Plutchak's analysis is in many ways correct
> especially where he understands that the argument is not just about money.
> However is he not wanting to overturn international copyright agreements,
> where there is attempt to balance copyright protection and exceptions to
> copyright? I am thinking particularly of the Berne three-step test. In the
> new European Directive the three-step test has (as I understand it) been
> made central to the treatment of exceptions. Judging by the commennts
> relayed to this listserve the Directive has been welcomed by European
> librarians and it is (as I have pointed out here also) been broadly
> accepted by Publishers. Some might want to disturb the balance rather
> trying to make it applicable to the digital as well as the print
> enviroment but this is not the position of publishers. Should it be the
> position of librarians?
> 
> Anthony Watkinson
> 14, Park Street,
> Bladon
> Woodstock
> Oxfordshire
> England OX20 1RW
> phone +44 1993 811561 and fax +44 1993  810067