Re: RE: Haworth Press Journals

Lolly Gasaway writes:
>
> My long-term assumption was that for libraries general
> fair use rights were available but if the library had
> signed a contract or license agreement to the effect that
> it would not duplicate certain works in the collection.
> More publishers seem to be going to this type of
> license agreement; Dun & Bradstreet has long had this
> kind of restriction on its printed materials, but it is
> a signed license.
> While section 108 applies only to libraries and archives,
> it seems to me that subsection (f)(4) makes it clear that
> by contract a library can alter what would be basic fair
> use.
> This is limited to libraries, so perhaps the same
> ability to limit fair use rights does not exist for
> other parts of the Act.

I have always read 108(f)(4) somewhat differently. I read the first part of the sentence before the "OR" as saying that libraries still have the rights of fair use under SEc. 107 and that the second part says that it is still bound by any contractual obligations. But I have assumed that this means any VALID contractual provision and so if Sec. 107 pre-empted the contract it would then not be made valid by 108.

  Don Berman --  

     +--------------------------------------------------------+
     |  Donald H. Berman            |          (617) 373-3346 |
     |  Richardson Professor of Law |     FAX: (617) 373-8793 |
     |  Northeastern University     | Internet:               |
     |  School of Law               |      berman[_at_]ccs.neu.edu |
     |  400 Huntington Ave.         |                         |
     |  Boston, MA 02115            |                         |
     +--------------------------------------------------------+