[SCC_Active_Members] Heads Up - Copyright Law and Orphan Works

[H.M. Gladney]

That diminishes the risk, but not the cost implicit in the management of a
distinct class of records.  BTW, the "fair use" provision of U.S. copyright
law already goes some distance towards allowing educational and scholarly
use of copyright protected content, even allowing quotation.

In a nutshell, your clarification does not lead me to change my opinion that
CHM should not endorse the restriction you suggest.

Cheerio, HMG 
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul McJones [mailto:paul at mcjones.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 5:24 PM
To: H.M. Gladney
Cc: 'Sellam Ismail'; scc_active at computerhistory.org; Dan Price (Dan Price)
Subject: Re: [SCC_Active_Members] Heads Up - Copyright Law and Orphan Works

I wasn't very precise in my previous message, but I would clearly ask for
enough to avoid a "dark archive".  I had said "for the purposes of
preservation and historical/educational use" -- that would need to be turned
into legalese allowing a variety of nonprofit uses.



H.M. Gladney wrote:
> Asking only for preservation permission would drive one towards a 
> "dark archive"--i.e., a collection subset that could not be freely
disseminated.
> 
> This possibility is not only unattractive, but is likely to incur 
> significant extra administrative costs compared to a repository that 
> makes all its preserved holdings available.  It further is a potential 
> source of infringement litigation in the case of a "dark" holding that 
> is mistakenly made available.
> 
> I.e., in my view, CHM should not endorse this possibility.
> 
> Cheerio, HMG
> -----Original Message-----
> From: scc_active-bounces at computerhistory.org
> [mailto:scc_active-bounces at computerhistory.org] On Behalf Of Paul 
> McJones
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 3:14 PM
> To: Sellam Ismail
> Cc: Lee Courtney; scc_active at computerhistory.org
> Subject: Re: [SCC_Active_Members] Heads Up - Copyright Law and Orphan 
> Works
> 
> For the purposes of preservation and historical/educational use, would 
> it be necessary to ask that these "orphaned" works pass into the public
domain?
> Perhaps there is a less final status that would suffice for us, such 
> as saying that it would become legal to copy for purposes of preservation,
etc.
> If the original copyright holder later spoke up (before the copyright 
> term expired), he/she could still try to go after commercial users.
> 
> I'm not sure if my idea makes legal sense, but the idea is to ask for 
> as little as possible...
> 
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> Sellam Ismail wrote:
> 
>>>I ran across a pointer to a request from Senate Judicary Committee 
>>>that the Library of Congress study impact of orphaned works WRT to 
>>>current copyright law. ...
> 
>