Re: complementary copies of text books

Doesn't the law wrt unsolicited samples apply here? My understanding is that most of these textbooks are sent to professors in the hopes of persuading them to use the texts in future courses. They're part of a marketing strategy, not something the professors request. Based on the practice at my law school, I suspect that the majority of the books donated to the library are the ones the professors decided not to use. Isn't it true that if a shampoo manufacturer sends me an unrequested free sample in the mail, that I become the owner of that sample without any reciprocal obligations on my part whatsoever? Is there any legally-significant difference between the shampoo sample and the unrequested sample textbook?
Laurie

>>> lawlists[_at_]bodi.com 8/22/03 1:37:24 PM >>>
I would think that the issue is whether the professor is really the "owner"
of the individual work. I would think that the contract might be written to
give some type of "loaner" right to the professor, and thus the true owner
is still the publisher.

-Bodi
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brock Shinen" <brock[_at_]frenzellaw.com> To: "CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property" <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:17 PM
Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: complementary copies of text books

> I'm curious - Section 109 of the US Copyright Act allows an owner of
a
> particular copy of something to give it away. If a publisher and a
professor
> agree (let's assume they actually agreed - otherwise we'll get into a
whole
> new discussion on whether "complementary copy, not for resale"
actually
> forms a contract), would this be enforceable, since it circumvents
copyright
> law? Or, is this one aspect of copyright ownership which can be held
by the
> owner? My guess is that since it's an exception to the exclusive
rights of
> an owner, then it is not a right at all, e.g., you can't agree to
prevent
> someone from giving it away.
>
> In sum, does the stamp, "complementary copy, not for resale," mean
anything?
> If it forms a contract, will it be enforced? I don't think it
actually forms
> a contact, absent something more. But if it did???
...
> Brock
>
> On 8/21/03 2:25 PM, "Robert F. Bodi" <lawlists[_at_]bodi.com> wrote:
>
> > My understanding is that a donation is not a resale, so what is the
problem?
> > If the publishers have a problem with the donations, they need to
go after
> > the professors, not the library. Any cause of action would most
likely be
> > under contract, not copyright, as no copying has occurred, and the
donated
> > book is an authorized copy. Thus, no infringement.
Received on Mon Aug 25 2003 - 23:30:04 GMT