[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Future of the "subscription model?"

But Band does speak for the ARL and its member institutions, 
which is one reason I asked the question.

Sandy Thatcher

At 8:01 PM -0500 11/9/11, Rick Anderson wrote:
> >Does this mean libraries will push the envelope further on using
>>"fair use" to justify more copying than in the past?
>I can't speak for anyone else, but as far as I'm concerned, the
>proper interpretation of fair use is not affected by the size of
>my budget. A use doesn't become more or less fair based on my
>ability to pay for subscriptions.
>>Jonathan Band, adviser to the ARL on legal issues, believes that
>>"transformative use" can justify copying of ANYTHING except
>>current textbooks, on the theory that everything else (journal
>>articles, monographs, etc.) is written for a specific audience
>>of peers and not intended for classroom use, thus "re-purposed"
>>when copied for classroom use. See what he has to say on this
>>subject in the briefing paper he provided to ARL in the
>>HathiTrust suit. Band argues: "the scholarly works of nonfiction
>>that . . . probably constitute the majority of the works within
>>the Proposed Use, now serve a different purpose from when
>Jonathan Band doesn't speak for me, so I won't presume to speak for him.
>Rick Anderson
>Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections
>J. Willard Marriott Library
>University of Utah