Copyright and intellectual property are arguably among the most important and most contentious social issues of our times. The internet can be used for open sharing or for vigorous enforcement of an expanding range of IP rights. What kind of society emerges in the future will depend a lot on the outcome of some of the current debates. The open access movement is a key driver of the push for open sharing.
Libraries and librarians are active proponents not only of open access but also fair and balanced copyright, at an international level. Library associations like the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) and the European Bureau of Library, Information and Documentation Associations (EBLIDA), are among the very few voices for the users of copyrighted materials at international venues such as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the EU. Library associations work with like-minded groups to uncover the intellectual property discussions that have moved from relatively open, democratic venues such as WIPO to secretive trade treaties (the now-defunct ACTA, TAFTA, the TPP). Library associations are among the most vocal and effective advocates for balance in copyright laws at the national level. At the institutional level, my perspective is that there is a growing role for librarians with respect to copyright. This is in part due to the increasing role of librarians in scholarly communication. Another factor is the shift from print-based materials and copyright to the electronic environment where the mix of contract, licensing and rapidly evolving copyright law make for a much more complex and not at all settled environment. Here, librarians play a central role in the licensing of electronic resources which overlaps with copyright. The push by ARL libraries and others to eliminate non-disclosure clauses and the fight for public libraries' right to lend e-books are examples of library leadership in these areas. The institutional roles of libraries can include such matters as educating and advising the community and formulating institutional policy. Again from my perspective, there is an increasing tendency for librarians to take on a leadership role with respect to copyright at academic institutions, precisely because of the overlap with related functions (licensing and scholarly communication), and this is a good thing. Information studies programs are expanding their education in this area. For example, I am currently teaching a course in the MIS program at ÉSIS on information and the law, and copyright is a major focus. It is in the context of this understanding of these leadership roles of the profession in the areas of copyright and licensing that I argue that in the case of the institutional repository, where authors are depositing their own work, the library should avoid taking on the role of copyright guarantor. This should remain in the hands of the depositor / author, unless the author specifically requests that the library undertakes this service. If we wish scholarly authors to assert their own rights to their work, then when they come to the library to deposit their work in the IR, it is reasonable to presume that the author has this right, and that if they do not have such a right, then they should be aware of their actions in transferring copyright, or at the very least that they are adults and have the right to take responsibility for their own actions. It strikes me that some good legal language to make it clear who is taking responsibility (the individual, not the library except if the library is asked to do this) would be helpful. Libraries have relationships with publishers which overlaps this scenario. My suggestion is that libraries should only undertake to bring copyright into such relationships when it clearly increases the rights of authors to disseminate their work. With a good faculty permissions policy (like MIT's), the library is in a position to negotiate blanket dissemination of a publisher's works in the IR along with their license. Many libraries are now negotiating for rights for their own authors in their contracts for subscriptions. For the faculty member, this is a pure positive (more dissemination, less work for them), where being denied a right to post one's own work is a negative. best, -- Dr. Heather Morrison Assistant Professor École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies Master of Information Studies (M.I.S.) program accredited by the American Library Association Maîtrise en sciences de l’information (M.S.I.) accréditée par l’American Library Association University of Ottawa http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html [email protected] _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
