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

RE: Fair use (Re: Xerox ContentGuard)

> And tracking what you do with an article??

I'm not sure I'm following your thread here (that "and" doesn't refer back
to anything I can identify in my previous posting), but I don't think I
said anything about the appropriateness of tracking.
> So, no they don't have to but yes it would make very very good sense if
> they did include fair use considerations even in software design.
> It would make very good sense for content owners to become very pro- users
> rights and pivacy-for users rights with regards to "their" material.

If you mean that they should design software that does not prevent the
fair use of copyrighted materials, I agree with you to an extent.  And if
you're saying that the content owners who impose licenses should become
more pro-user, then I agree with you, too (though some are doing much
better than others already).  But if you mean that copyright owners should
define what constitutes fair use for the material they're selling, then I
disagree strongly, even if their definition seems generous.  I think that
doing so sets a dangerous precedent and furthers the incorrect notion,
held by many, that just because you own a copyright you can tell other
people how to use the information you own.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about: I've got a friend who
publishes a newsletter.  On each copy is a notice saying that any reader
can feel free to copy and distribute the newsletter as he or she sees fit,
but that each copy must include the entire issue -- readers are not
allowed to copy single articles and distribute them.  Sounds reasonable,
right?  The problem is that my friend does not have the legal authority to
impose that restriction (unless he wants to go through the process of
imposing a license agreement).  He's certainly within his legal rights to
say "Copy and distribute this newsletter as you see fit," because he's the
copyright holder.  But it seems to me that once he has published the
information and distributed it without requiring readers to agree to
licence terms, he DOESN'T have the legal authority to tell them "You may
not copy individual articles," because the law (or, I guess, legal
precedent) makes it pretty clear that they can, within the bounds of fair

Do sharper legal minds than mine agree with this, or am I missing


Rick Anderson
Head Acquisitions Librarian
Jackson Library
UNC Greensboro
1000 Spring Garden St.
Greensboro, NC 27402-6175
PH (336) 334-5281
FX (336) 334-5399

"Eisenhower tried to explain in a patient
voice and with small words that an
interstate road system has nothing to do 
with getting somewhere and everything to do
with time and space and the hieroglyphics
of the mind." 
              -- David Thomas