Re: Academics and coursepacks

Jeremy G. Byrne <jeremy[_at_]iz.org> wrote:
>
> On 7/07/98, Michael Scarpitti <mscarpit[_at_]asnt.org> wrote:
> >
> > If [a] professor is teaching a Shakespeare class, and [...] he uses
> > the new Oxford Shakespeare (ed. by Wells?) and simply photocopies a
> > play or two for a class of 200, we have a serious problem [...]
> > For the prof to refuse to ask permission is outright arrogant
> > thievery.
>
> If I have bought a copy of your book of public-domain information,
> surely I've adequately compensated you for the making of it, and can
> therefore do with it as I choose.

[...]
> What you're describing as "outright arrogant thievery" may be
> technically illegal in the US, but I'd really like to know why you
> believe it's _immoral_ too.

The theft is of the work of the editor(s); the person(s) who researched and wrote the foreword (or preface or introduction or afterword) and notes that appear at the bottom of the page (or in the margins or at the end), which are copied along with the text.

So long as all that appears on the page is Shakespeare's text itself, provided the editing is not so drastic as to qualify it as an adaptation rather than an edition, I personally have no problem with photocopying it. But if the notes and introduction are also copied, then IMO the copier is well out of line (unless the notes and introduction are so old as to have passed into the public domain themselves, of course).

The two cents are mine, and not Mr. Scarpitti's; perhaps he sees it differently.

Amy Stoller

ghoti
<redherring[_at_]tuna.net>
<:)))>><( Received on Thu Jul 09 1998 - 16:59:24 GMT