Week 5: E reserves, Fair Use and GSU

The readings this week were about the fair use guidelines, how they applied to E-Reserves, and a real life case featuring Georgia State University.

In class we discussed three sets of fair use guidelines discussed in the readings:

1. Agreement on Guidelines for Classroom Copyright (Approved by Congress 1976)

1. Brevity--Article of 2,500 words or less or excerpt of 1000 words or 10%
2. Spontaneity--Use must be from individual teacher and a directive from the Institution. Use should be for late-breaking, current information
3. Cumulative effects--Work can be used for only one course; not used from term to term; only one article/work per author and no more than three from a periodical volume

2. ALA Recommendations (1982)

I. Presents the four fair use factors of Title 17, 107.
II. Unrestricted photocopying:
a.)Writing published before Jan 1, 1978 that has not been copyrighted
b.) Published works with expired copyright.
c.) Unpublished works. (pre Jan1, 1978)
d.) U.S. Gov Publications
III.Permissible photocopying of copyrighted works.
a.) Research and preparing for teaching--chapter, article, story, essay, poem, chart.
b.) Classroom uses--One semester, only one copy/student, copyright notice, no profit.
c.) Library Reserve Uses

3. CONFU (1991)

Educational Fair Use Guidelines for Educational Multimedia is the only one of these three fair use guidelines to actually be formulated with digital works in mind. It is a long set, so better to follow the link.

We specifically discussed the case of Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, and SAGE Publications vs. individuals at Georgia State University for "systematic, widespread and unauthorized copying and distribution of a vast amount of copyrighted works." I thought perhaps the library could be protected by claiming the "good faith" defense. However, it seems that their original policy had been out of the mainstream enough to make it a target.
Because there is no clear set of guidelines, libraries devise their own policies regarding fair use and distribution. The trick seems to be to maintain the push/pull balance between academic users (who need to take stands on fair use, because they are the major stakeholders in the survival of fair use practices)and academic publishers (who rightly want to not give away all of their products for free). Giving in too much to publishers could mean erosion of fair use practice, but there are limits that will need to be followed.