Re: [Videolib] Preservation vs. prohibitions on duplication
The Music Library Association's copyright page has a good summary of copyright law governing pre-1972 sound recordings at http://copyright.musiclibraryassoc.org/Resources/AudioPreservationAndAccess , under the section titled Discussion. The post below is correct; pre-1972 sound recordings are covered by state law, effectively New York State law. The cutoff date is 1972, not 1976, as that's when Congress passed a law including sound recordings under federal copyright, as per the footnote in http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ56.pdf __ Pamela Bristah, Music Librarian, Wellesley College, 106 Central Street, Wellesley MA 02481 phone 781-283-2076, fax 781-283-2869, pbris...@wellesley.edu videolib@lists.berkeley.edu on Thursday, September 30, 2010 at 1:39 PM -0400 wrote: It is not my area of expertise, but I believe it is by state law and the contracts that were originally signed. The music librarians are way up on this.� I can ask a colleague from the OITP Copyright Advisory Subcommittee to respond, if you like (who knows this stuff). � mb � Michael Brewer Team Leader for Instructional Services University of Arizona Libraries [ mailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu ]brew...@u.library.arizona.edu � From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Jessica Rosner Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 10:26 AM To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Videolib] Preservation vs. prohibitions on duplication � Is there somewhere I can read up on this? If they are not covered by US copyright law, what are they covered by ? On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Brewer, Michael [ mailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu ]brew...@u.library.arizona.edu wrote: Pre 1976 musical recordings are not covered by US Copyright law, though, so 108 does not apply (and was not written for them).� This is the problem.� If it did apply, there would be no problem here, as libraries and archives could digitize the old stuff that is deteriorating under 108 for preservation purposes. � Michael Brewer Team Leader for Instructional Services University of Arizona Libraries [ mailto:brew...@u.library.arizona.edu ]brew...@u.library.arizona.edu � From: [ mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu ]videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:[ mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu ]videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Jessica Rosner Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 10:02 AM To: [ mailto:videolib@lists.berkeley.edu ]video...@lists.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Videolib] Preservation vs. prohibitions on duplication � I would have to read the report itself but copyright law does not in any way prevent the PRESERVATION of audio recordings. In fact the section of everyone keeps going to justify making a copy of deteriorating work was written for audio recordings. What the law does do is prevent the preserved work from being used by anyone save researchers who must go to archive/library which preserved it. Bottom line works can preserved for archival purposes, but they can not be sold or made available outside the archive. I see little likelihood of any change in copyright law that would allow preserved material still under copyright to be made available beyond the archive without permission of the rights holder. This is frustrating since many rights holders are hard to find, often ornery and may want a lot of money, but they are still the owners. There has of course been a movement to allow orphan works , particularly those in the last years of copyright to be copied, but again I just don't see major changes in copyright law because the big rights holders have too much at stake ( as well as the little ones). On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Shoaf,Judith P [ mailto:jsh...@ufl.edu ]jsh...@ufl.edu wrote: I thought this was interesting, focusing on audio recordings and the preservation vs. copyright situation. [ http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_endangered_digital_recordings ]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_endangered_digital_recordings judy Judith P. Shoaf Director, Language Learning Center University of Florida PO 117300 Gainesville, Florida 32611 352-392-2112 VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. � VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool
Re: [Videolib] Marketing list of librarians?
Just out curiosity Mike, do you know if ALA has different categories of membership. Would you be sold on a list as a librarian? On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Mike Tribby mike.tri...@quality-books.comwrote: I shouldn't be forced to opt out in order to control what flows into my mailbox. The connection between my recent ALA renewal and the barrage of emails from video companies cannot be coincidental. As far as i am concerned this is reason enough to not renew my ALA membership next year. Helen's situation would seem unlikely to be purely the result of coincidence, but when I renewed my ALA membership (for the 18th year in a row? Gad, I need a change), I noticed no increase in vendor emails either at work or at home. In the past when I have noticed a spike in unwanted email traffic from vendors, it has corresponded to times I've gone to conferences or expositions and signed in to or for something, or given my business card out. It's been so long now that I don't remember exactly how my ALA membership profile is set, but, at least in my experience, simply renewing my ALA membership has not had the results Helen mentions, so maybe changing one's profile works. This is not to say that vendors don't traffic in contact lists, just that ALA isn't the only culprit involved in disseminating contact information for librarians. Mike Tribby Senior Cataloger Quality Books Inc. The Best of America's Independent Presses mailto:mike.tri...@quality-books.com -Original Message- From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Helen P. Mack Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 8:27 AM To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Videolib] Marketing list of librarians? That's terrible. They're like vultures! I just wrote an angry message to ALA Member Services, detailing the fact that I had just changed my profile to eliminate all communications except for official ALA ones (ballots, renewals, etc.). It's a shame that it has come to this, but I don't want to be put on any mailing list unless I opt in. I shouldn't be forced to opt out in order to control what flows into my mailbox. The connection between my recent ALA renewal and the barrage of emails from video companies cannot be coincidental. As far as i am concerned this is reason enough to not renew my ALA membership next year. VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Re: [Videolib] Marketing list of librarians?
This is interesting because the last time I tried to buy an ALA list which was some years ago, they did NOT have list specific to media librarians. On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Meghann Matwichuk mtw...@udel.edu wrote: I think Mike is on to something -- I am an ALA member, as is the other media librarian in my department. When I register for conferences I always make sure to check the opt-out box on the registration form so that I don't get deluged with advertisements / invitations / etc. from distributors, most of which do not have anything to do with my area of specialty. My colleague doesn't. The deluge he gets is pretty phenomenal. We both get postcards / catalogs / etc. from media vendors, who I always supposed built their own lists based on web searches, past purchase records, listserv participation, etc. These are much more useful, for the most part. I was head of Membership for VRT several years back, and I am still getting junk mail from my days in that role -- I think because I was the contact point when VRT rented a booth and booth materials, and had my information in the ALA Membership directory. But otherwise, it's been minimal. Happy Friday, * Meghann Matwichuk, M.S. Associate Librarian Instructional Media Collection Department Morris Library, University of Delaware 181 S. College Ave. Newark, DE 19717 (302) 831-1475 http://www.lib.udel.edu/ud/instructionalmedia/ On 10/1/2010 9:55 AM, Mike Tribby wrote: I shouldn't be forced to opt out in order to control what flows into my mailbox. The connection between my recent ALA renewal and the barrage of emails from video companies cannot be coincidental. As far as i am concerned this is reason enough to not renew my ALA membership next year. Helen's situation would seem unlikely to be purely the result of coincidence, but when I renewed my ALA membership (for the 18th year in a row? Gad, I need a change), I noticed no increase in vendor emails either at work or at home. In the past when I have noticed a spike in unwanted email traffic from vendors, it has corresponded to times I've gone to conferences or expositions and signed in to or for something, or given my business card out. It's been so long now that I don't remember exactly how my ALA membership profile is set, but, at least in my experience, simply renewing my ALA membership has not had the results Helen mentions, so maybe changing one's profile works. This is not to say that vendors don't traffic in contact lists, just that ALA isn't the only culprit involved in disseminating contact information for librarians. Mike Tribby Senior Cataloger Quality Books Inc. The Best of America's Independent Presses mailto:mike.tri...@quality-books.com mike.tri...@quality-books.com -Original Message- From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Helen P. Mack Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 8:27 AM To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Videolib] Marketing list of librarians? That's terrible. They're like vultures! I just wrote an angry message to ALA Member Services, detailing the fact that I had just changed my profile to eliminate all communications except for official ALA ones (ballots, renewals, etc.). It's a shame that it has come to this, but I don't want to be put on any mailing list unless I opt in. I shouldn't be forced to opt out in order to control what flows into my mailbox. The connection between my recent ALA renewal and the barrage of emails from video companies cannot be coincidental. As far as i am concerned this is reason enough to not renew my ALA membership next year. VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It
Re: [Videolib] Swank Digital Campus
Hi Kim, I guess I disagree with Gary. Short term access to resources for classes is something we've provided for forever in Reserve Services here at the University of Connecticut. Historically that was books but now we've grown to journal articles, full text links to journals and ebooks, personal copies, and now streaming video and audio. We've used Swank for a couple of semesters now. They are expensive but we apply the same criteria to obtaining Swank streams as we do for other streams. e.g. when one or more of the following conditions arise: used for more than one class in more than one semester, used at a regional campus where students are non-resident, and to support distance learning and blended classes. Although nowhere near half of our streams come from Swank, our data shows that about half of what's put on Reserve are feature films. In answer to your original questions. The Library is responsible for the transaction and our name is on the invoice. We also pay for the stream. And, no, once explained to them, faculty understand the short term duration of the access. There are other departments who help faculty develop online courses but since our library has so much valuable content which already license and can be used for online courses (e.g. ejournals, ebooks, newspapers, images, etc.), the provision of moving image streams is a very natural addition to content provision. I might add that it is not just online courses which benefit from e-whatever. Blended courses and even traditional courses also benefit. Jo Ann Jo Ann Reynolds Reserve Services Coordinator University of Connecticut Homer Babbidge Library Storrs, CT 860-486-1406 jo_ann.reyno...@uconn.edu Question Reality -Original Message- From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of ghand...@library.berkeley.edu Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 4:17 PM To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Videolib] Swank Digital Campus Hey Kim As you know, this is one of the many things that gets me seeing crimson. I am categorically NOT one of those librarian types that refuses to let go of traditional function or to embrace new...but: I can see no justification whatsoever for libraries getting into the business of picking up the tab for short term/ephemeral access...it simply doesn't make sense to me--certainly not from a budgetary standpoint. Libraries acquire, organize, catalog...physical or not, the stuff we acquire has always been inventoriable...and that's the way it should be, in my book. Support of short-term, course-specific access belongs elsewhere, unless campus is willing to beef up your budget sufficiently... If this were to develop on my campus, I'd most definitely foist it off on our Sakai wonks (Educational Technology Services)--the folks who develop, manage, and maintain classroom technologies and resources. That's where it belongs. Gary Handman Hi all, I think we're about to license our first streaming film through Swank Digital Campus. The usage scenario is so different from what I normally deal with. Typically, my library licenses individual films from distributers for use by all current student faculty, for a term ranging from 3 years to perpetuity and we stream the content from a library-run server and management system. The Swank content would be license for 1 semester, would only be accessible to a specific class and would be hosted off-site. I'm trying to figure out what my library's role should be in the Swank scenario. If you've used Swank Digital Campus at your institution (or deal with other short term/ course specific digital rights), could you tell me how this was handled. * Who is responsible for the transaction - i.e whose name is on the contract/ invoice? The Library, the academic department, the faculty member, another campus group? * Who directly pays for the content? * If both of the above were handled by the library, was there any resistance to this sort of short term, limited access being the library's responsibility? * Is there another department on your campus that more directly supports development and resources for online courses? What was their involvement? Thanks! Kim Stanton Head, Media Library University of North Texas kim.stan...@unt.edu P: (940) 565-4832 F: (940) 369-7396 VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. Gary Handman Director Media Resources Center Moffitt Library UC Berkeley 510-643-8566
Re: [Videolib] Swank Digital Campus
I am not sure if we are talking about the same kind of film, but fiction feature films are nearly always licensed from large companies or sales agents that represent them and you definitely may not license them to anyone beyond the term of your contract without their agreement. I imagine if you work directly with a filmmaker things are different, but contracts for standard feature films limit the distributor's rights to the term of the contract. In general rights not explicitly granted in a contract belong to owner. There was a lot of nasty arguments when DVD came in and companies realized that most old contracts did not cover the format. It would hardly make sense for a company to license a film to distributor for say 7 years and yet allow the distributor to license it in perpetuity. What for instance would prevent a distributor from making all TV sales and Netflix deals in perpetuity? They would also have fire sales when rights were expiring and just start selling rights to anyone they could get any money from . The reason rights are so damn complicated with foreign and independent films is that they change and expire so often. Streaming rights are a contract, not a physical item like a print or DVD which can be sold for life of format and a company whose rights are limited to a certain period can't sell them to someone else for a longer period. I am currently involved in sales marketing for a number of films. With one group I work with the director so these films can be licensed for a month or in perpetuity as she owns all the rights. The others I work with are under contract with several very large European companies and under no circumstances could I legally license them in perpetuity. If the issue came up, I could ask them if they would agree, but unless a LOT of money is involved I would not hold my breath. They would certainly take legal action if they found out I was claiming rights to license their films beyond the terms in the contract. Again films where are working directly with a filmmaker may have more flexibility because of the relationship, but I am referring to fiction feature films many of which are under contract from large and often litigious rights holders. Every contract I have ever seen or been involved with on those would not allow a distributor to sell any rights extending beyond their own contract. If anyone else who deals with fiction feature titles want to comment I would be most interested. On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Elizabeth Sheldon elizab...@kinolorber.com wrote: For clarity, unless a contract between a filmmaker and a distributor specifies that the distributor may not grant licenses that extend beyond the original Term of the contract, a distributor may license a film for any given period of time during the original license period. For example, if a contract was signed in 2005 for a seven year term, a distributor could grant licenses that extend ten years beyond, or even, in perpetuity. The right to grant licenses expires in 2012, not the licenses granted to the end user. For example, a PPR license is for the life of the DVD. Even if the distributor only has seven years to grant PPR licenses to customers, the customer's license does not end when the distributor's contract ends. Likewise with digital site licenses, it is for the term of the digital site license agreed to between the institution and the distributor. Unless there are underlying rights issues and/or a clause that limits the term of a license to a certain period beyond the end of the original contract, there is no reason for a distributor not to offer a digital site license in perpetuity. From a legal point of view. Best, Elizabeth Elizabeth Sheldon Vice President Kino Lorber, Inc. 333 W. 39th St., Suite 503 New York, NY 10018 (212) 629-6880 www.kinolorberedu.com On Sep 30, 2010, at 5:08 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: As a practical matter Swank really can't license for more than one academic year. This is what I have been trying to explain re studio product. I think is is very unlikely they will ever allow Swank, Criterion Pictures ( Fox films) or even themselves to license for more than a year. Anything is possible but I would not hold my breath. Similarly most independent and foreign films are likely to be able to license for say 1-7 years because 7 years is the standard contract term though some go up to 10 or more, however the clock starts ticking when the contract is signed so a film released in 2005 is likely only to have 2 years of licensing life left. In many cases these films are renewed, but in many cases they are not and a whole lot of companies go out of business these days leaving a lot of films in limbo. The Swank scenario may be more restrictive in terms of use than some, but for fiction feature films, most are going to be time limited and few available in perpetuity unless it is put into new contracts from
Re: [Videolib] Swank Digital Campus
Reserve books are inventoriable...they presumably get cataloged and become part of the library's collection, no? gary Hi Kim, I guess I disagree with Gary. Short term access to resources for classes is something we've provided for forever in Reserve Services here at the University of Connecticut. Historically that was books but now we've grown to journal articles, full text links to journals and ebooks, personal copies, and now streaming video and audio. We've used Swank for a couple of semesters now. They are expensive but we apply the same criteria to obtaining Swank streams as we do for other streams. e.g. when one or more of the following conditions arise: used for more than one class in more than one semester, used at a regional campus where students are non-resident, and to support distance learning and blended classes. Although nowhere near half of our streams come from Swank, our data shows that about half of what's put on Reserve are feature films. In answer to your original questions. The Library is responsible for the transaction and our name is on the invoice. We also pay for the stream. And, no, once explained to them, faculty understand the short term duration of the access. There are other departments who help faculty develop online courses but since our library has so much valuable content which already license and can be used for online courses (e.g. ejournals, ebooks, newspapers, images, etc.), the provision of moving image streams is a very natural addition to content provision. I might add that it is not just online courses which benefit from e-whatever. Blended courses and even traditional courses also benefit. Jo Ann Jo Ann Reynolds Reserve Services Coordinator University of Connecticut Homer Babbidge Library Storrs, CT 860-486-1406 jo_ann.reyno...@uconn.edu Question Reality -Original Message- From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of ghand...@library.berkeley.edu Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 4:17 PM To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: [Videolib] Swank Digital Campus Hey Kim As you know, this is one of the many things that gets me seeing crimson. I am categorically NOT one of those librarian types that refuses to let go of traditional function or to embrace new...but: I can see no justification whatsoever for libraries getting into the business of picking up the tab for short term/ephemeral access...it simply doesn't make sense to me--certainly not from a budgetary standpoint. Libraries acquire, organize, catalog...physical or not, the stuff we acquire has always been inventoriable...and that's the way it should be, in my book. Support of short-term, course-specific access belongs elsewhere, unless campus is willing to beef up your budget sufficiently... If this were to develop on my campus, I'd most definitely foist it off on our Sakai wonks (Educational Technology Services)--the folks who develop, manage, and maintain classroom technologies and resources. That's where it belongs. Gary Handman Hi all, I think we're about to license our first streaming film through Swank Digital Campus. The usage scenario is so different from what I normally deal with. Typically, my library licenses individual films from distributers for use by all current student faculty, for a term ranging from 3 years to perpetuity and we stream the content from a library-run server and management system. The Swank content would be license for 1 semester, would only be accessible to a specific class and would be hosted off-site. I'm trying to figure out what my library's role should be in the Swank scenario. If you've used Swank Digital Campus at your institution (or deal with other short term/ course specific digital rights), could you tell me how this was handled. * Who is responsible for the transaction - i.e whose name is on the contract/ invoice? The Library, the academic department, the faculty member, another campus group? * Who directly pays for the content? * If both of the above were handled by the library, was there any resistance to this sort of short term, limited access being the library's responsibility? * Is there another department on your campus that more directly supports development and resources for online courses? What was their involvement? Thanks! Kim Stanton Head, Media Library University of North Texas kim.stan...@unt.edu P: (940) 565-4832 F: (940) 369-7396 VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of
[Videolib] Best Practices for Managing Video Collections
Dear Colleagues, Can anybody tell me where I can find a Best Practices for managing video collections? Thanks to everybody for answering my previous questions. The information you've provided has been very helpful. Benjamin Turner Assistant Professor, Instructional Services St. John's University Libraries turn...@stjohns.edu 718.990.5562 VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Re: [Videolib] Best Practices for Managing Video Collections
There is no such thing. At risk of shamelessly flacking my work, my Greenwood book has stuff in it that still holds true: http://www.greenwood.com/catalog/GR1658.aspx There are a handful of Guidelines out there Kris Brancolini's Audiovisual policies in ARL libraries is looking a bit shaggy these days, but you could check it out. http://books.google.com/books?id=Cu3gMAAJpg=PA144lpg=PA144dq=guidelines+Brancolinisource=blots=eBcTNwEGCFsig=sS9tJpxuaV_Wp74m_Eor4mWIg8Ehl=enei=Uh6mTLfDMYHGsAP4rJz-Dgsa=Xoi=book_resultct=resultresnum=1ved=0CBIQ6AEwAA#v=onepageqf=false Guidelines for Media Resources in Academic Libraries (2006) (spearheaded by Kris B and others) http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/mediaresources.cfm is still useful Dear Colleagues, Can anybody tell me where I can find a Best Practices for managing video collections? Thanks to everybody for answering my previous questions. The information you've provided has been very helpful. Benjamin Turner Assistant Professor, Instructional Services St. John's University Libraries turn...@stjohns.edu 718.990.5562 VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors. Gary Handman Director Media Resources Center Moffitt Library UC Berkeley 510-643-8566 ghand...@library.berkeley.edu http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC I have always preferred the reflection of life to life itself. --Francois Truffaut VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
Re: [Videolib] Swank Digital Campus
Thank you, Elizabeth for this clarity. I had been told the same thing from Criterion, in Canada. However, many of the distributors who have digital rights do not uphold this belief. They tell us that they cannot license beyond their agreement with the rights' holder. I've often brought up the DVD sold with perpetual use as the parallel with digital or streaming rights. If they can sell the DVD for its physical life, they should be able to sell the streaming rights with the same condition. Alas, they don't seem to accept it. Or, do you think I'm being sold a bill of goods on that? I know Dennis has mentioned that a digital file can be converted to other streaming standards. to clarify, we cannot convert an MPEG 4 file to whatever the next standard is, can we? Would that not be a new version, and therefore require new permission, and perhaps a payment? Susan Elizabeth Sheldon wrote: For clarity, unless a contract between a filmmaker and a distributor specifies that the distributor may not grant licenses that extend beyond the original Term of the contract, a distributor may license a film for any given period of time during the original license period. For example, if a contract was signed in 2005 for a seven year term, a distributor could grant licenses that extend ten years beyond, or even, in perpetuity. The right to grant licenses expires in 2012, not the licenses granted to the end user. For example, a PPR license is for the life of the DVD. Even if the distributor only has seven years to grant PPR licenses to customers, the customer's license does not end when the distributor's contract ends. Likewise with digital site licenses, it is for the term of the digital site license agreed to between the institution and the distributor. Unless there are underlying rights issues and/or a clause that limits the term of a license to a certain period beyond the end of the original contract, there is no reason for a distributor not to offer a digital site license in perpetuity. From a legal point of view. Best, Elizabeth Elizabeth Sheldon Vice President Kino Lorber, Inc. 333 W. 39th St., Suite 503 New York, NY 10018 (212) 629-6880 www.kinolorberedu.com On Sep 30, 2010, at 5:08 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: As a practical matter Swank really can't license for more than one academic year. This is what I have been trying to explain re studio product. I think is is very unlikely they will ever allow Swank, Criterion Pictures ( Fox films) or even themselves to license for more than a year. Anything is possible but I would not hold my breath. Similarly most independent and foreign films are likely to be able to license for say 1-7 years because 7 years is the standard contract term though some go up to 10 or more, however the clock starts ticking when the contract is signed so a film released in 2005 is likely only to have 2 years of licensing life left. In many cases these films are renewed, but in many cases they are not and a whole lot of companies go out of business these days leaving a lot of films in limbo. The Swank scenario may be more restrictive in terms of use than some, but for fiction feature films, most are going to be time limited and few available in perpetuity unless it is put into new contracts from now on and again I would not hold my breath for that. Jessica On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Stanton, Kim kim.stan...@unt.edu wrote: Hi all, I think were about to license our first streaming film through Swank Digital Campus. The usage scenario is so different from what I normally deal with. Typically, my library licenses individual films from distributers for use by all current student faculty, for a term ranging from 3 years to perpetuity and we stream the content from a library-run server and management system. The Swank content would be license for 1 semester, would only be accessible to a specific class and would be hosted off-site. Im trying to figure out what my librarys role should be in the Swank scenario. If youve used Swank Digital Campus at your institution (or deal with other short term/ course specific digital rights), could you tell me how this was handled. Who is responsible for the transaction i.e whose name is on the contract/ invoice? The Library, the academic department, the faculty member, another campus group? Who directly pays for the content? If both of the above were handled by the library, was there any resistance to this sort of short term, limited access being the librarys responsibility? Is there another department on your campus that more directly supports development and resources for online courses? What was their involvement? Thanks! Kim Stanton Head, Media Library University of North Texas kim.stan...@unt.edu P: (940) 565-4832 F: (940) 369-7396 VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage
