Here's an excerpt:

This Public[3] Report is the outcome of the work of the COMMUNIA Network on the Digital Public Domain (hereinafter "COMMUNIA"). This Report was undertaken to (i) review the activities of COMMUNIA; (ii) investigate the state of the digital public domain in Europe; and (iii) recommend policy strategies for enhancing a healthy public domain and making digital content in Europe more accessible and usable.

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Weblog | Digital Scholarship |

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Harvard Library announced it is making more than 12 million catalog records from Harvard’s 73 libraries publicly available.

The records contain bibliographic information about books, videos, audio recordings, images, manuscripts, maps, and more. The Harvard Library is making these records available in accordance with its Open Metadata Policy and under a Creative Commons 0 (CC0) public domain license. In addition, the Harvard Library announced its open distribution of metadata from its Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) scholarly article repository under a similar CC0 license.

"The Harvard Library is committed to collaboration and open access. We hope this contribution is one of many steps toward sharing the vital cultural knowledge held by libraries with all," said Mary Lee Kennedy, Senior Associate Provost for the Harvard Library.

| Open Access Bibliography: Liberating Scholarly Literature with E-Prints and Open Access Journals: Those wishing to learn more about the open access movement would be well served by turning to Bailey's Open Access Bibliography. . . .This title is a major contribution to the study of the open access movement in general, as well as its emergence in the early twenty-first century. — Mary Aycock, Library Resources and Technical Services 52, no. 3 (2008): 212-213. | Digital Scholarship |

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Nature Publishing Group (NPG) today is pleased to join the linked data community by opening up access to its publication data via a linked data platform. NPG's Linked Data Platform is available at http://data.nature.com.

The platform includes more than 20 million Resource Description Framework (RDF) statements, including primary metadata for more than 450,000 articles published by NPG since 1869. In this first release, the datasets include basic citation information (title, author, publication date, etc) as well as NPG specific ontologies. These datasets are being released under an open metadata license, Creative Commons Zero (CC0), which permits maximal use/re-use of this data.

| Digital Scholarship's Digital/Print Books | Digital Scholarship |

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The Harvard Library will deposit approximately 200,000 public domain volumes in HathiTrust, a shared digital repository for published materials. This follows Harvard's first deposit of approximately 53,000 volumes in HathiTrust in 2011.

"The Harvard Library is committed to collaboration and easing access to its materials. Partnerships like this create significant opportunities for research libraries to lead during a period of rapid changes in higher education and scholarship in the digital age, and for researchers to benefit from their initiative" said Mary Lee Kennedy, Harvard's senior associate provost for the Library.

| Digital Curation and Preservation Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

Here is an excerpt from a synopsis of the case from the Legal Information Institute:

Congress enacted Section 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act in order to comply with the international copyright standards of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. Section 514 restores copyright protection to foreign works currently found in the public domain. Lawrence Golan and other performers, educators, and motion picture distributors brought this suit challenging Section 514, arguing that Congress's removal of works from the public domain exceeded its Copyright Clause powers. Golan also argues that Section 514 violates the First Amendment because the law does not serve any important government interests. Attorney General Holder counters that the Copyright Clause does not restrict Congress's authority to remove works from the public domain. He further argues that Section 514 does not violate the First Amendment because the government has a substantial interest in complying with the Berne Convention and protecting American works abroad.

Here's an excerpt from the ruling:

Congress determined that U. S. interests were best served by our full participation in the dominant system of international copyright protection. Those interests include ensuring exemplary compliance with our international obligations, securing greater protection for U. S. authors abroad, and remedying unequal treatment of foreign authors. The judgment §514 expresses lies well within the ken of the political branches. It is our obligation, of course, to determine whether the action Congress took, wise or not, encounters any constitutional shoal. For the reasons stated, we are satisfied it does not. The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit is therefore Affirmed.

In a lengthy dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer said:

The fact that, by withdrawing material from the public domain, the statute inhibits an important preexisting flow of information is sufficient, when combined with the other features of the statute that I have discussed, to convince me that the Copyright Clause, interpreted in the light of the First Amendment, does not authorize Congress to enact this statute.

Justice Samuel Alito also dissented.

| Digital Scholarship |

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The scoping study includes an illustrative comparison of national legislations that directly, or indirectly, define the public domain; and a survey of initiatives and tools, which may affect access, use, identification and location of public domain material.

| Digital Scholarship |

Here's an excerpt:

After clarifying the notion and different areas of the (digital) "public domain" the paper engages in discussing literature on its relevance for society in general and economic innovation in particular. The effectiveness of the utilization of these abstract potentials however depends on the respective public domain regulation. In this context, the paper distinguishes different regulatory modes and arenas in both copyright and patent law, thereby focusing private regulatory initiatives such as Creative Commons or Biological Open Source (BiOS). In the last section, the paper presents open research questions and makes some preliminary suggestions for potential research strategies.

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

Here's an excerpt from the Supreme Court's Granted and Noted List entry that describes the case:

Section 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994 (Section 514) did something unique in the history of American intellectual property law: It "restored" copyright protection in thousands of works that the Copyright Act had placed in the Public Domain, where they remained for years as the common property of all Americans. The Petitioners in this case are orchestra conductors, educators, performers, film archivists and motion picture distributors, who relied for years on the free availability of these works in the Public Domain, which they performed, adapted, restored and distributed without restriction. The enactment of Section 514 therefore had a dramatic effect on Petitioners' free speech and expression rights, as well as their economic interests. Section 514 eliminated Petitioners' right to perform, share and build upon works they had once been able to use freely. The questions presented are:

1. Does the Progress Clause of the United States Constitution prohibit Congress from taking works out of the Public Domain?
2. Does Section 514 violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution?

Transcripts of the oral arguments are available. The first one has been made public.

Read more about it at "Supreme Court Weighs Legality of Putting Public Domain Works Back under Copyright."

| New: Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011 | Digital Scholarship |

Here's an excerpt:

1.1 The Smithsonian Institution's Terms of Use and Licensing Policy are in violation of 17 U.S.C. § 105 (the "works of government" clause of the Copyright Act) and 20 U.S.C. § 41 (the "increase and diffusion of knowledge among men" clause of the Smithsonian Charter). . . . .

6.1 Injunction. That the Smithsonian Institution be instructed to cease and desist all further "take down" notices until this matter has been thoroughly investigated.

6.2 Investigation. That the Board of Regents investigate and analyze the intellectual property policies of the Smithsonian Institution to determine if such policies are in violation of the Copyright Act or the Smithsonian Charter.

6.3 Restitution. That the Smithsonian Institution work with the community to create high-resolution scans of the Seed Displays source material that is not under copyright by external, non-governmental entities and that such high-resolution scans be released on the Internet with no restrictions on use.

| Digital Scholarship |

Here's an excerpt:

Ah, the public domain: Where creative work is supposed to wind up after a limited period during which the creator has exclusive control over distribution and copying. An ever-growing pool of literature, music, photography, video and art that we can use not only as inspiration but also as the direct basis for new works, annotating, deriving or just plain redistributing.

What a wonderful thing.

Too bad it's basically been frozen for quite a few years now, with almost nothing new entering the pool (except government publications—which start in the public domain) and things tagged with the Creative Commons CC0 license. Oh, and probably a few cases where a creator's been dead more than 70 years and has works produced since 1923.

Not only has it been frozen in the U.S., there are laws and treaties that would appear to shrink the public domain pool—which should, by any rational reading of the Constitution, be flatly unconstitutional.

| Digital Curation and Preservation Bibliography 2010 | Institutional Repository Bibliography | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 |

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The goal of the new policy is to make high quality digital images of Yale's vast cultural heritage collections in the public domain openly and freely available.

As works in these collections become digitized, the museums and libraries will make those images that are in the public domain freely accessible. In a departure from established convention, no license will be required for the transmission of the images and no limitations will be imposed on their use. The result is that scholars, artists, students, and citizens the world over will be able to use these collections for study, publication, teaching and inspiration.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography |

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

CLIR has launched a new publication series, "Ruminations." The series will feature short research papers and essays that bring new perspective to issues related to planning for and managing organizational and institutional change in the evolving digital environment for scholarship and teaching.

We inaugurate the new series with a report by John P. Wilkin that posits the scope of works in the public domain and probable extent of orphan works in our research library collections, based on an analysis of the HathiTrust book corpus. The question of rights status is critical since it governs how works can be used or reused, especially in the digital environment.

Recent research shows that HathiTrust's collection—which currently holds more than 5 million digitized books—is highly representative of research library collections. On this premise, Wilkin has analyzed HathiTrust's holdings and drawn preliminary conclusions about the proportion of works that are in-copyright, in the public domain, or are orphans—that is, works whose holders cannot be located.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Here's an excerpt:

Now, you too can help, by adopting one of the 300 volumes of the First Series of the Federal Reporter, which are all out of copyright. Your tax-deductible contribution of $1200 will pay to double-key 1,000 pages of Federal Appellate Opinions, and copies will be donated to the National Archives and the Government Printing Office.

Your name—and the link of your choice—will be inscribed on the Public Domain Wall of Fame and each case in your adopted volume will be a separate HTML file with a common footer

This volume of American Law was transcribed for use on the Internet through a contribution from [Your Name Here!!]

| Digital Scholarship |

Here's an excerpt:

This paper reports results from a large recent study of the public domain in the European Union. Based on a combination of catalogue and survey data our figures for the number of items (and works) in the public domain extend across a variety of media and provide one of the first quantitative estimates of the 'size' of the public domain in any jurisdiction.

See also their related eprint "The Value of the EU Public Domain."

Read more about it at "Bill Would Curb Access to Government Works."