Three cheers to Gary for sticking up for the content owners.
Bob
Film Ideas, Inc.
On Jan 30, 2012, at 2:55 PM, videolib-requ...@lists.berkeley.edu wrote:
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of videolib digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: ACRL Best Practices (ghand...@library.berkeley.edu)
>
> From: ghand...@library.berkeley.edu
> Date: January 30, 2012 10:50:13 AM CST
> To: pauf...@american.edu, videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
> Subject: Re: [Videolib] ACRL Best Practices
> Reply-To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
>
>
> Thanks, Pat (and thanks again for spearheading the development of these
> guidelines)
>
> I am a still a bit concerned about the e-reserves section--the limitations
> and enhancements not withstanding.
>
> If I am reading this section correctly, almost any full-length copyrighted
> video work that is central to the curriculum ("the instructor’s
> pedagogical
> purpose") could conceivable be digitized and streamed for use in
> face-to-face classroom teaching under the banner of "transformative use"
> (I screen Avatar in an ethnic studies class to discuss metaphors of
> imperialism, bingo! Transformative!)
>
> It seems to me that this particular section ignores (or at least attempt
> to trump) the established tests of fair use, as, for example, cases in
> which a content owner/provider that has an existing or potential
> significant economic stake in making content available online.
>
> Thanks as always for your views and input.
>
> Gary Handman
>
>
>> Thank you for reading these!
>> 1) In terms of e-reserves (section 1), it's really important to read both
>> the limitations and the enhancements. They qualify that general assertion,
>> and make clear that you need a transformative purpose, which in the case
>> of
>> e-reserves would be appropriate to the course. You can also see that there
>> are limitations regarding the type of material as well. And of course
>> appropriate amount, as the general material in the code stresses, is
>> always
>> an issue.
>>
>> *LIMITATIONS *
>>
>> Closer scrutiny should be applied to uses of content created and marketed
>> primarily for use in courses such as the one at issue (e.g., a textbook,
>> workbook, or anthology designed for the course). Use of more than a brief
>> excerpt from such works on digital networks is unlikely to be
>> transformative and therefore unlikely to be a fair use.
>>
>> The availability of materials should be coextensive with the duration of
>> the course or other time-limited use (e.g., a research project) for which
>> they have been made available at an instructor’s direction.
>>
>> Only eligible students and other qualified persons (e.g., professors’
>> graduate assistants) should have access to materials.
>>
>> Materials should be made available only when, and only to the extent that,
>> there is a clear articulable nexus between the instructor’s pedagogical
>> purpose and the kind and amount of content involved.
>>
>> Libraries should provide instructors with useful information about the
>> nature and the scope of fair use, in order to help them make informed
>> requests.
>>
>> When appropriate, the number of students with simultaneous access to
>> online
>> materials may be limited.
>>
>> Students should also be given information about their rights and
>> responsibilities regarding their own use of course materials.
>>
>> Full attribution, in a form satisfactory to scholars in the field, should
>> be provided for each work included or excerpted.
>>
>> *ENHANCEMENTS:*
>>
>> The case for fair use is enhanced when libraries prompt instructors, who
>> are most likely to understand the educational purpose and transformative
>> nature of the use, to indicate briefly in writing why particular material
>> is requested, and why the amount requested is appropriate to that
>> pedagogical purpose. An instructor’s justification can be expressed via
>> standardized forms that provide a balanced menu of common or recurring
>> fair
>> use rationales.
>>
>> In order to assure the continuing relevance of those materials to course
>> content, libraries should require instructors of recurrently offered
>> courses to review posted materials and make updates as appropriate.
>>
>>
>> 2) In terms of copying to preserve (e.g. VHS to DVD), again it's important
>> to look at the limitations; in this area, the existence of commercial
>> availability is the very first reference. This is a transformative
>> purpose,
>> in the sense that this material, which had been unuseable for teaching
>> purposes (usually what drives such a decision is a teacher's need for
>> materials that are either fragile or that no longer have players in the
>> classroom) is made useful again. This clause in no way undercuts a
>> distributor's ability to offer a commercial service, and in no way does it
>> give librarians a blank check to copy over their collections wholesale
>> from
>> format to format. You know, most librarians don't want to spend their time
>> transferring material from obsolete formats, and at the end of the day
>> getting poor-resolution copies with limited functionality. Really.
>>
>> *LIMITATIONS*:
>>
>> Preservation copies should not be made when a fully equivalent digital
>> copy
>> is commercially available at a reasonable cost.
>>
>> Libraries should not provide access to or circulate original and
>> preservation copies simultaneously.
>>
>> Off-premises access to preservation copies circulated as substitutes for
>> original copies should be limited to authenticated members of a library’s
>> patron community, e.g., students, faculty, staff, affiliated scholars, and
>> other accredited users.
>>
>> Full attribution, in a form satisfactory to scholars in the field, should
>> be provided for all items made available online, to the extent it can be
>> determined with reasonable effort.
>>
>>
>>
>> *ENHANCEMENTS:*
>>
>> Fair use claims will be enhanced when libraries take technological steps
>> to
>> limit further redistribution of digital surrogates, e.g., by streaming
>> audiovisual media, using appropriately lower-resolution versions, or using
>> watermarks on textual materials and images.
>>
>> Fair use claims will be further enhanced when libraries provide copyright
>> owners a simple tool for registering objections to use of digital
>> surrogates, such as an e-mail address associated with a full-time
>> employee.
>>
>>
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.
