Huh?  Did you read the paper?  (It was linked from the article)

It has * nothing at all * to do with streaming rights.    In fact, the only 
reference to streaming is the penultimate paragraph which poses the question:  
How are streaming media and born digital media going to be distributed for 
public performance?

Otherwise this article is all about the issue of distributors claiming the need 
for PPR for face-to-face teaching.

-deg farrelly

**********
Jessica wrote:

With all due respect I think that is a terrible and misleading title. I
don't even think those claiming the right do digitize and stream films for
students in classes would use the term " Public Performance Rights" which
inevitably  refers to showing a film to the public in public. Ironically I
think the presenter is falling for the misleading information or set up used
by some distributors who try to claim that an exempt "face to face"
classroom use requires a PPR license. The much more contentious question and
which IS in legal dispute is the use of films OUTSIDE the physical classroom
and whether there is some special exemption that covers that under some
reading of "fair use". I realize it is just the title and I presume the
usual issues will come up, but I think it starts with a false premise of
some kind.

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.

Reply via email to