by jason novetsky
In the field of information policy, there are a number of pressing issues that librarians are forced to consider and contend with on a regular basis. Among those is the changing role of copyright laws. Copyright is a form of protection for creative works offered by the U.S. Constitution that makes it illegal to copy said work without express permission from the creator or publisher. Traditionally, copyright laws have operated in such a way that all three parties involved—the creators, the publishers, and the users—are all able to benefit from the creation of the work. The system operates on the notion that (financial) reward for the creation of a work encourages further exploration and publication. As copyrights eventually expire (and may not necessarily be renewed), the system includes a built-in mechanism for these materials to eventually enter the public domain. Libraries serve an interesting function in the midst of the copyright and sales process, providing access of copyrighted materials to many different users.
Traditionally, this arrangement has worked very well. Libraries purchased copyrighted materials, such as books, magazines or films, and kept them in their collections indefinitely or until they were worn out. In the digital age, however, information is far less frequently stored in a physical format, and the ability to acquire new materials permanently, becomes more difficult. In recent years, libraries have made use of licensing agreements in lieu of outright purchases more frequently. This is generally a less expensive way of obtaining access to online journals, e-books, et cetera. A license is a legal contract that determines how a work can be used and by whom, as well as what both parties—licensor and licensee—are obligated to do. It is said that in licensing “everything is negotiable”. This has caused some to question whether copyright has been made irrelevant. This can be a concern to libraries as the license agreements usually veer toward the advantage of the licensor, restricting the rights that the end user has to the content.
Whereas the concept of “fair use” allows users a certain degree of leeway around the specifics of the copyright, licenses often do not permit such freedom. Moreover, license agreements pertain to only a limited period of time, and acquisitions made through them do not result in the library gaining a permanent resource. During an economic downturn, for example, a library may be forced to reduce its operating budget, and information that had theretofore been available to patrons is suddenly lost. Even if the subscription is kept, the information that the library initially subscribed to may not be the same information that it receives ten years later. When a book is added to the collection, its content never changes. Databases and other online sources are constantly in flux.
Another issue related to copyright is the emergence of Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology. DRM is a way of encoding certain digital files that prevents them from being copied. This may be done with music CDs, DVDs, computer programs, et cetera. Publishers of these digital materials contend it is their right to protect the copyrighted works, but this also prevents users from creating a backup copy for personal use, which copyright law has always permitted.
Like all new technologies, digital media has its positive and negative attributes. The advantages, such as the variety and sheer amount of the data that can be collected, cannot be ignored. On the other hand, the information can be unreliable, inaccessible for some users, and may impinge on certain freedoms. Copyright law has existed for over 200 years in this country and only recently is seeing the first serious challenge to its relevance. Libraries are caught in the middle, trying to find the balance between information that is useful but also unrestricted, and affordable as well as enduring and reliable.
Questions
1. If you were an acquisitions librarian and had the freedom to purchase whichever materials you liked, would you focus more on digital resources or print materials?
2. Most e-books are only compatible on PC’s or specialized “e-book readers”, and do not offer support for other computers, like Macs. In effect, this automatically cuts out a portion of the patronage from using the materials. Is the end result a type of de facto discrimination against non-PC owners? Should the library be concerned? Is this any different from offering traditional printed books, which the blind cannot use?
3. Copyright law has always warned against illegal duplication of a work, and left it to the publisher to go after violators. DRM now makes it impossible to violate the law. Is punishing those that break the law different from preventing people from breaking it? Is it a violation of personal freedoms? Do we not have the right to break the law and then risk the consequences?
4. Should librarians be concerned with the issues raised in question 3? Is it their place to make any statement or should they remain neutral? What steps can the library take to offer the most high-quality information it can without limiting the rights of patrons, and without making an overt statement?
Works Sited
US Copyright Office. 3-21-08.
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#what
American Library Association. 3-11-08. http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/woissues/copyrightb/copyrightarticle/librariescreatures.cfm
“Is Copyright Dead?” Special Libraries Association. 3-19-08. http://www.sla.org/content/Shop/Information/infoonline/2001/mar01/copyright.cfm
“Imagine No Restrictions: Digital Rights Management”. School Library Journal. 3-20-08.
http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6448189.html
on novetsky
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
I have a couple of personal experiences with copyright laws and licenses. The first one has to do with copyright laws; as a teacher it is important to be able to show videos that are relevant to the curriculum. Due to copyright laws teachers need to be very careful about what they show to their class and must have evidence of how it pertains to the curriculum. Therefore, if you want to show your class a movie for fun you legally are not allowed to, and if you do the teacher can be held accountable. The school I work at started purchasing a license which allows us to show videos for any reason as long as they are made by a company included in the license. Before we started purchasing this license it was up to the school media specialist to make sure the video fit in with the curriculum before they put it into our video system to be shown.
#1. A quick response: Whether I chose digital or print format depends on which would make that particular item more accessible to the patron base (all else—principally, cost—being equal). And as we’re seeing, particularly in some examples from the School Library Journal article you cited at http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6448189.html, digital media licenses can be restrictive (especially for recreational reading, though the terms for scholarly articles can be restrictive, too). So it depends.
The following comment doesn’t quite answer 3. or 4., but I think it’s relevant to both: I think it’s fine for libraries to join in efforts to make materials as publicly accessible as possible. But don’t channel your resources on trying to prevent rights holders from trying to protect the copyrights that the laws have already granted them. Instead work to change the copyright laws themselves. (They’re too long. For one commentators’ thoughts on this and on how it benefits large companies like Disney more than individuals, you might start with this piece by Lawrence Lessig, a law professor who's vocal against the broadening of copyright laws and restrictions, at http://search.ft.com/ftArticle?queryText=Time+to+End+the+Race+for+Ever-Longer+Copyright&y=0&aje=true&ct=0&id=021016008504&x=0&nclick_check=1.)
I agree with Holly that I would probably focus a bit more on digital materials. It does seem that people are now wanting to access material in digital form, rather than print. Digital formats also have certain advantages. For instance, the fact that a great variety of information can be provided and easily accessed.
However, there are also many disadvantages, such as having to deal with the issue of Digital Rights Management. The fact that not everybody will be able to access these resources is important too. To deal with this issue, librarians would have to do the best they can to level the playing field. As Holly stated, education and outreach are important and one way of doing this. At the same time I would also try to meet the needs of all patrons by making sure to provide plenty of print resources as well.
Jason in response to question #1: As an acquisitions librarian, I would have to focus on both digital resources and print materials. As technology continues to grow and expand, many seem to forget that not everyone is computer literate. I think the old saying goes, “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks,” applies to those loyal library patrons, who just want to sit and read a tangible book. I search the web daily, even if I find an e-book that I like, I don’t read it as much as a tangible book. When I read a book I would like the information I read to be factual.
In Fool’s Gold: Why the Internet is No Substitute for A Library, author, Mark Y. Herring, discusses how unreliable the website Wikipedia can be, since its information can be manipulated by anyone. He goes on to tell a story of how a story about John Seigenthaler, a one-time administrative assistant to Robert Kennedy was linked to the assassination of Robert Kennedy and JFK. Shortly after some protest Wikipedia changed its submission policy. According to Herring “ What the Wikipedia story revealed is the flawed nature, not just of how stories are developed in that source, but the whole architecture of the web.” Despite the growth of digital resources, librarians need to still advocate for the old traditional use of the library for job security and for the sake of information.
I have the flu, excuse me, if this doesn't make sense.
Herring, M. Y. (2007). Fool's Gold: Why the Internet is No Substitute for a Library. In M. Y. Herring,(p. 28). Jefferson, NC: Mc Farland & Company.
In response to question #1, I'd like to think of libraries using digital media as expanding and improving their collection's range and availability, rather than being forced to choose between being on the cutting edge of technology and reducing more traditional materials that their communities might be more familiar with. In reality, budget limitations and other considerations make it necessary for libraries to make choices. I think that if I were in the position to have to make choices about acquiring digital media versus print material, I think I'd have to consider the needs of the community. It's all very well and good if digital media is the wave of the future, if the patrons aren't as interested in using the new materials, then it would probably be best to add to that collection more slowly and continue to maintain the print collection at the same levels. Otherwise, I say full steam ahead! If the patrons are using and responding positively to digital media, then I'd definitely try to integrate it into the collection while still acquiring books, magazines, etc. that are used by the patrons.
The question of investing in more tangible forms of media versus digital media is a difficult one. Your post presents the issues of providing more of one than the other and both are necessary to promoting a sustained patronage in the community. However most of what I took away from your post was the importance of spending money and having access to the materials. I think I would have to invest more heavily in materials I know my patrons would always have be able to access. Don't get me wrong I realize the necessity of maintaining resources in the collection that would need to be renewed and are not physically stored in the library but with other resources there is the security of knowing that once you buy it you don't have to pay for it over and over again with the potential for the informaion to change therefore allowing quality to change.
In terms of the second questions of MAC users being neglected, the majority of computers purchased are PC's. That is why the software is designed with their abilities in mind. Libraries are never going to be able to give every patron exactly what they want. Our responsibility is to try and serve as many patrons as possible not just in numbers but in spectrum. The MAC users always have the option of using terminals at the library to gather their materials.
I do think that preventing people from breaking the law is a challenge to public freedom. I also think that actions like those inhibit innovations. Great advancements in any field do not always come from the experts. One of the most importsnt innovstors in television technology wasn't part of some huge research team employed by a corporation, he was a seventeen year old farmer. Blocking access doesn't give people the chance to play with material to test its potential. Copyright material does need to be protected but there should be a happy medium for those creating the material and those trying to get the material. According to the ALA, "The Digital Age presents new challenges to fundamental copyright doctrines that are legal cornerstones of library services. Libraries are leaders in trying to maintain a balance of power between copyright holders and users, in keeping with the fundamental principles outlined in the Constitution and carefully crafted over the past 200 years".
American Library Association 3-29-08
Libraries and Copyright in the Digital Age
http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/woissues/copyrightb/copyright.cfm
As with nearly every issue facing librarians and libraries these days, I am torn between what I would do as an acquisitions librarian. While I am partial and maybe old fashion I cannot help but want to purchase the print materials. However, I completely recognize the changing face of libraries and see the usefulness and practicality in purchasing digital materials as well. We are in the digital age after all.
What frustrates me is that there doesn't seem to be a perfect balance between the two. While I think it is important to retain print collections, the unfortunate part is that it is not practical and often as a response to the cost for acquiring digitial materials, those real tangible books that you can hold often get the ax.
The problem I see though with digital resources in addition to them being more costly is that the upkeep and preservation of them takes much more effort than print material. However, it is a necessary evil given that information flows much faster in a digital age. We seem to have acquired the "we need it now" mentality and it doesn't seem to be going away any time soon.
The problems facing digital material need a resolution. As Shahnaz Zuberi mentions in the article Digital Publishing: A New Challenge for Libraries, "because of the dependency of digital material on continuous changing technology and technical and legal limitations in copying, long-term preservation for future use are major issues which no single library or organization can resolve. If we fail to address these issues now there is a chance that our future generations may not be able to benefit from the results of research and development work being done across the globe in recent years."
In short, I would have to do my best to strike a balance between the print and digital materials, letting the community needs guide my decisions. What I think it really always boils down to is meeting the needs of those that actually use the library.
works cited
Zuberi, S. Digital Publishing: A New Challenge for Libraries. Pakistan Library & Information Science Journal v. 38 no. 1 (March 2007) p. 11-16
I would also (maybe a little reluctantly) focus on digital materials. Even though it's tempting to try to keep the physical paper and binding form of books alive as much as possible, we have to change with the times and meet the demands of the patrons. Honestly, has anyone cited a print source lately for this class or any other reason? I'm sure a few people have, but personally I go for online and digital sources first because they are so much easier and quicker to deal with. If our goal is to provide information as specifically as possible to the patron's needs, digital is the way to go.
#1: If I were a Acquisitions Librarian in an academic library I would have go with digital material because the benefits outweigh the negatives. Those benefits include ease of addressability, the fact that multiple users can access the same information at the same time, and shelving space saving. You have succinctly outlined the negatives in your post, so I will not repeat them here. I would only add that the vast majority of digital media is scholarly in nature.
The situations where it is most advantageous are where the user base is technologically sophisticated, demands a wide breadth of information available and where there is periodic high demand for certain materials. This describes the needs of Academic and, to a slightly lesser extent, Cooperate libraries. In both cases the digital collection should be designed to enhance the libraries print collection, not necessarily overlap it.
However, it does not describe the needs of public libraries (especially small ones), or many types of special collection. In these cases digital media would be less likely to make it into the collection because of its high cost and low demand for the service.
Pearlmutter, J. Which online resources are right for your collection?. School Library Journal v. 45 no. 6 (June 1999) p. 27-29
I'm with all those who are for dividing it up between the digital and print materials, however, I would focus more on the print materials when it came to books, etc....main reason being that DRM could cause a lot of heartache for patrons. If you recall, a few years back, Sony/BMG put out several CD's with technology like this, and it ended up containing spyware which could do a serious number on a computer's hard drive. No one wants that, be it on a library's computer or a patron's private home computer when they borrow something with DRM technology!
Wow!
I was not aware of some of the issues that you have all brought up. The spyware embedded in some Sony/BMG's products, the rules regarding what types of films teachers can show their classes. This is some truly fascinating and yet disturbing stuff.
I hope that no one felt my post was too biased against digital technologies. That wasn't my point so much as to point out how troublesome the details surrounding the new media can be.
Post a Comment