Re: copyright expiration as a spur to creativity

On 7/29/98, James Michael Rogers <jetan[_at_]ionet.net> wrote:
>
> On 7/28/98, Laureen C. Urquiaga <urquiagal[_at_]lawgate.byu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > OK, I may be wrong, but isn't this already allowed by Section 108e of
> > the Copyright Law? If I want a copy of a book, and I make a reasonable
> > search to locate a copy but there is none to be had ... what is to
> > prevent me from having my local library make a photocopy of the book
> > (whether part of their collection or obtained through ILL)? I'm not
> > relying on fair use here, but the library's explicitly authorized right
> > of reproduction.
>
> My recollection is that this only an archival right on the part on
> the library, as opposed to a right to copy and distribute to readers.

   Title 17, Section 108:

   (e) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section

       apply to the entire work, or to a substantial part of it, 
       made from the collection of a library or archives where the user
       makes his or her request or from that of another library or
       archives, if the library or archives has first determined, on the
       basis of a reasonable investigation, that a copy or phonorecord
       of the copyrighted work cannot be obtained at a fair price, if -

       (1) the copy or phonorecord becomes the property of the user, and
       the library or archives has had no notice that the copy or
       phonorecord would be used for any purpose other than private
       study, scholarship, or research; and

       (2) the library or archives displays prominently, at the place
       where orders are accepted, and includes on its order form, a
       warning of copyright in accordance with requirements that the
       Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation. 

Am I reading this wrong, or doesn't this ALREADY give library users the right to request that an ENTIRE WORK be copied for them if no other copy is available at a fair price (and who gets to decide what a fair price is, anyway?)?

And to consider Bob Cumbow's question about copying recordings: is it absolutely necessary that the LIBRARY make the copy? Am I, as a library patron, precluded from taking a library book which has ~legitimately~ been determined to be otherwise unavailable and making my own copy because it's less expensive for me to run the copier than to pay a library clerk to do it? It sounds to me like I am, but what if the library is so threatened by the idea of a lawsuit that they refuse to make the copy to which I am "entitled"?

Of course, the liklihood that I'll be sued is pretty small anyway, but in this litigation-happy world, nobody wants to take risks.

IF I can make my own copy of a book, can I borrow (directly or through ILL) a music CD that is unavailable and make my own copy? Libraries are much less likely to copy phonorecords than print materials, even though both are covered by the statute.

Also, is this one of those activities threatened by the current UCC 2B proposal? IE, if the recording I would like to have copied has been copy-protected, would 2B place the cooperating library in jeopardy for honoring my request, even though that request is explicitly authorized by 108(e)?

Laureen C. Urquiaga
Hunter Law Library, Brigham Young University urquiagal[_at_]lawgate.byu.edu Received on Thu Jul 30 1998 - 16:25:40 GMT