[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Double Licenses
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: Double Licenses
- From: melas@ils.unc.edu (Steven Melamut)
- Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 21:03:27 EST
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
I am confused. Let's assume that a vendor and the university sign a license agreement for the vendor to provide the university with student access to a digital database. The license (contract) prohibits certain uses. Among the prohibited uses is mass downloading of the database or republishing the materials on the Internet. If a student successfully copies material to a public Internet site, in violation of the license, the violation is between the university and the vendor because they are the parties to the contract. It is a breach of contract - no copyright issues involved. The vendor can sell you a license to a digital copy of the phone book (ProCite does don't they). The contract is binding despite the fact that it is unprotected by copyright law. The responsibility for preventing violations of the license lie with the university. Punishment of the student is the university's problem. That should be fine with the vendor since the student is likely to be impoverished or unidentifiable. It is not a copyright issue. It is a question of contract law. However, that does not mean the student can freely do what she wants. The student can only assume the rights the university has available to transfer. Another words, there is still no fair use issue for the student because there is no fair use right to transfer. In practical terms, this just means that this defense is unavailable to the university when everyone goes to court. It would seem in the best interests of the university to warn the students about any restrictions on the database. The question of the vendor's "double license" should be covered in the original license the university and the vendor signed. Someone at the university should be carefully examining the license. I have seen at least one contract this year where the corporation attorneys got confused and placed the wrong parties in the wrong place in the contract... steve (naturally the opinions, errors in logic, or whatever, that appear above are solely my own) ****************************************************** Steven Melamut Kathrine R. Everett Law Library University of North Carolina CB #3385 Ridge Road Chapel Hill, NC 27599 melamut@email.unc.edu work: 919-962-1194 fax: 919-962-1193 ******************************************************
- Prev by Date: 'Double' Licenses
- Next by Date: Re: paper on libraries and publishers
- Prev by thread: Re: Double Licenses
- Next by thread: RE: Double Licenses
- Index(es):