[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Internet Archive's Open-Text Archives Initiative
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: Internet Archive's Open-Text Archives Initiative
- From: Joseph Esposito <espositoj@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 00:08:31 EST
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
I am not so sure publishers would routinely grant permission for this use nowadays. Once upon a time this was a no-brainer, but the climate has changed. Those out-of-print titles that are still under copyright (probably the single largest category of books, compared to books that are in print and books that are in the public domain) are increasingly viewed as an asset whose economic value should be probed. If a hardcopy book costs $30, publishers might feel, with some justification, that mounting the book on an institutional Intranet (definitely not the public Internet), should cost more. How much more? The marketplace has not yet told us. Certainly such permission is likely to be granted for only a limited period of time--say, one year or perhaps three. There are other reasons to grant permission, of course, and at the top of the list is establishing the precedent that permission is necessary. Joe Esposito On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 19:59:49 EST, John Cox <John.E.Cox@btinternet.com> wrote: > The act of scanning a copyright work without the permission of the > copyright owner is likely to be a breach of copyright. Such permission > can be sought directly from the publisher, or covered by a licence from > the local Reproduction Rights Organisation (RRO), e.g. CCC in the USA, CLA > in the UK, Access Copyright in Canada, etc. > > Making a copy available to library users is 'distribution', whether it is > confined to users within the library premises or not. 'Distribution' > without permission or a licence is similarly likely to be a breach of > copyright. > > Copying or scanning complete works clearly falls outside fair use or fair > dealing, and may well fall outside the scope of most RRO licences, so > permission from the publisher (or from the author if the publishing rights > have reverted to the author) is the safest way to proceed. That a book > may be out of print, but still in copyright, makes no difference. > > All of that said, this initiative is good for scholarship and for the > community, and it is likely that most publishers would readily grant the > permission required, provided that it is sought. > > John Cox > > Managing Director > John Cox Associates Ltd > E-mail: John.E.Cox@btinternet.com > Web: www.johncoxassociates.com
- Prev by Date: Re: Fascinating quotation
- Next by Date: Re: Internet Archive's Open-Text Archives Initiative
- Previous by thread: Re: Internet Archive's Open-Text Archives Initiative
- Next by thread: Re: Internet Archive's Open-Text Archives Initiative
- Index(es):