Re: thought for the week

On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Robert Cumbow <rcumbow[_at_]grahamdunn.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 30 Jul 1999, Jeroen Hellingman <jehe[_at_]kabelfoon.nl> wrote:
> >
> > If a work is unavailable (because it is out-of-print, or out-of-stock,
> > an old publishers trick to avoid having to say out-of-print) for 5
> > years, the rights should revert to the original owner, and, after
> > another 5 years, irrevertably to the public. The initial period may
> > be longer, say 25 years, but after that, not keeping works available
> > is the same as abandoning it. If this is difficult to achieve by
> > changing current laws and international treaties, I would go for fair
> > use for single copies, and compulsory licensing for multiple copies.
>
> Most U.S. publishing agreements contain an "out of print clause" that
> (1) defines what will constitute "out of print", (2) requires the
> author to formally request that an o.p. work be brought back into
> print, (3) gives the publisher a specified amount of time in which to
> do so, and (4) provides for reversion of all rights to the author if
> the publisher fails to bring the work back into print by the deadline.
>
> As a collector of movie soundtrack music (among other things), I share
> the frustration of those who find specific works to be unobtainable
> because they are out of print. At the same time, as an i.p. lawyer,
> I am nervous about the idea of having works automatically enter the
> public domain after a certain term of unavailability. Many motives --
> commercial viability, someone's privacy, national security, someone's
> political safety -- may underlie an author's or publisher's decision
> to keep a work unavailable for a period of time; those circumstances
> should not necessarily implicate abandonment of the copyright.

The sad part is that authors and publishers don't seem to want to deal with any of the four points noted. As a text buyer charged to find the textbooks out professors want to use for their classes, I find myself going back and forth between authors and publishers, neither of whom seems to know what the state of that particular copyright is. Most recently, I attempted to locate a title that necessitated contacting the author, since we could not get the publisher (or assumed publisher) to give us any information on the book or the copyright status. The author was very generous, noting that the work in question had been done under federal grant, and therefore the substance of the work was not copyrightable. However, the publisher had copyrighted the "format and presentation." Thus, if we chose to have the book, someone would have had to retype it in a different format/presentation. I did try dealing with the publisher, leaving several messages which were never returned. Ultimately, the professor chose to just put the book on reserve (he had managed to hunt down 5 copies for a class of 60).

In another case, both the author and I tried dealing with the publisher of a book covering a phase of the development of the United States' environmental movement. Ultimately, she sold us copies from her own private stock, after I had exhausted all used book companies and any other caches I could find. The publisher was, to say the least, not cooperative.

I can accept your point that "many motives ... may underlie (a) ... decision to keep a work unavailable for a period of time". Unfortunately, I've yet to see a case where it seems to be no more a reason than that the publisher can't be bothered, and the authors, even when they look at their original publishing contract, are unable to ascertain who DOES currently carry the copyright!

Barb

Barbara Ruhmann
Text Buyer
UCD Bookstore
University of California
2828 Cowell Blvd.
Davis, CA 95616
Phone 530-752-5538
Fax 530-752-4791
e-mail brruhmann[_at_]ucdavis.edu
http://www-bookstore.ucdavis.edu/ Received on Tue Aug 03 1999 - 15:31:48 GMT