PUP v. MDS

On November 8, 1996, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals handed down its decision in the case of Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Services, Inc., holding that the making of photocopied coursepacks for sale by a for-profit copyshop is not fair use and is an infringment of copyright. This ruling comes from the court "en banc," meaning that all thirteen judges heard and ruled on the matter. Eight judges held that it was infringement; five concluded that the copying was fair use.

I have heard that MDS is prepared to seek review from the U.S. Supreme Court. The various dissenters provided a range of alternative understandings of fair use, resulting in a case that provides an excellent glimpse of the turmoil surrounding fair use. The range of views also makes the case an interesting prospect for Supreme Court review.

Kenneth Crews
Indiana University
<kcrews[_at_]velcome.iupui.edu> Received on Mon Nov 11 1996 - 21:05:34 GMT