Re: 1976 Copyright Act 108(d)

On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Rose Marie Parsons <rmparson[_at_]usd.edu> wrote:
>
> Clarification is needed:
>
> 1. Does 108(d) of the 1976 Copyright Act apply to in-house copying,
> to copying for interlibrary loan, or to both?
>
> 2. If 108(d) applies to interlibrary loan, is a library's interlibrary
> loan office required to keep a record including the patron's name
> of each request submitted in order to ensure that only one article
> per issue is requested for an individual user?

Section 108(d) applies to both in-house copying and interlibrary loan. The house report makes that clear in its gloss for subsection d, articles and small excerpts. It states "The copy or the phonorecord may be made by the library where the user makes his request or by another library pursuant to an interlibrary loan."

No, the requesting library is not required to keep records of its borrowing activity, contrary to popular opinion. The conference report says, "The conference committee understands that the guidelines are not intended as, and cannot be considered, explicit rules or directions governing any and all cases, now or in the future. It is recognized that their purpose is to provide guidance in the most commonly-encountered interlibrary photocopying situations, that they are not intended to be limiting or determinative in themselves or with respect to other situations, and that they deal with an evolving situation that will undoubtedly require their continuous reevaluation and adjustment. With these qualifications, the conference committee agrees that the guidelines are a reasonable interpretation of the proviso of section 108(g)(2) in the most common situations to which they apply today."

So, they are not required by law. They are just guidelines. However, every library I have known that has an interlibrary loan office and requests materials from another library does keep records and attempts to follow the spirit of the guidelines, many slavishly and religiously, others very loosely. Prudence, I suspect, has led to the former posture. The thrust is that libraries should not request copies in multiples or singles where the copying is related or systematic so as to substitute for subscriptions or purchases.

Stu Milligan, now gleefully retired from the library world, but not from copyright issues
<lilgamin[_at_]frontiernet.net> Received on Sat Aug 14 1999 - 18:13:56 GMT