[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Ryan v. CARL
- To: "'liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu'" <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: Ryan v. CARL
- From: David Davis <ddavis@copyright.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 22:57:19 EST
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
CCC has been asked about the Ryan v. CARL case. Judge Fern Smith's decision in this case does not necessarily affect CCC in a substantial way, both because of the particular facts of the case and because of CCC's own ways of doing business. In fact, the interpretation of the Copyright Act upon which Judge Smith granted summary judgment to the plaintiff authors does not seem controversial: she said, as the statute itself seems to say, that authors do indeed retain all rights to their contributions to collective works that they have not conveyed to publishers or others. But the case does not seem to affect CCC's business substantially in any event. First, it appears that the particular facts of CARL's practices seriously colored the Judge's view of the case. As a result, it would appear that the Judge was most focused on getting CARL to stop doing what it was doing in the way of granting itself permissions and then contacting the rightsholders afterward and offering them royalties set by CARL itself. But the Judge still recognized that, in any event, the publishers may indeed have the necessary rights to grant permissions without additional author consent, and she explicitly gave CARL the right to continue to seek to prove that. This was only a very preliminary decision in the lawsuit. Second, regardless of whether CARL is able to prove appropriate conveyance of rights in the particular instances of these freelance writers' works, that would be far less of an issue in any case involving the large majority of works for which CCC issues permissions and/or licenses to businesses and document delivery services. Most of the works which are most commonly sought for permissions from these customers (or used under licenses by these customers) fall into a few categories. The largest one is what are called STM works -- science, technical and medical books and journals. It is a fact that the most common practice in the area of STM works -- as well as in the areas of professional journals, many reference books, many of the more prominent newspapers and many business newsletters -- is for the publisher either (i) to receive an outright grant of the copyright, in writing, from the author(s), or (ii) to itself be the author under the legal doctrine of work-made-for-hire (that is, when the writer is an actual employee of the publisher, then the law considers the publisher and not the writer to be the legal "author" of the work). Of course, there are many other works where the outright grant of copyright by author to publisher is less common. (For example, in the areas of fiction and of freelance contributions to the popular and trade press, authors seem to retain their rights more frequently, but these works tend not to be among the more heavily photocopied works in CCC's various programs.) In the case of these works, CCC is actively working to expand its representation of authors as the sole or principal holder of the copyright rights. CCC has long represented thousands of authors either directly or through their representatives. We have been expanding that representation daily and are working to open new channels to improve our services to authors. For example, (i) We have been working with prominent associations of authors, photographers and graphic artists to publicize CCC's availability to them, including the National Writers Union and the American Society of Media Photographers, (ii) We have dedicated staff resources, under a Manager of Author Relations [Kristen Giordano, kgiordano@copyright.com], to reorganize and improve our services to authors and other creators, and (iii) We have recently built extensive capability into our "CCC Online" Website to ease the registration process for authors in CCC's various programs -- http://www.copyright.com . No matter what the outcome of the Ryan v. CARL case, we expect to be well positioned to continue to provide services to both copyright owners and users, including document delivery services, as these relationships evolve. Dave Davis Copyright Clearance Center http://www.copyright.com/ ddavis@copyright.com Voice: (978) 750-4283 x-2217
- Prev by Date: Re: copyright issues of scanned articles
- Next by Date: More coverage of UnCover ruling
- Prev by thread: More coverage of UnCover ruling
- Next by thread: Re: EBLIDA/ECUP/STM Joint Statement
- Index(es):