Copyright – Page 24 – DigitalKoans

Software Patents: Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Ruling

The Supreme Court has ruled in the Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank software patent case.

Here's an excerpt from "Bad Day for Bad Patents: Supreme Court Unanimously Strikes Down Abstract Software Patent":

In a long-awaited decision, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank today, striking down an abstract software patent. Essentially, the Court ruled that adding "on a computer" to an abstract idea does not make it patentable. Many thousands of software patents—particularly the vague and overbroad patents so beloved by patent trolls—should be struck down under this standard. Because the opinion leaves many details to be worked out (such as the scope of an "abstract idea"), it might be a few years until we understand its full impact.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"Liberating the Publications of a Distinguished Scholar: A Pilot Project"

Julie Kelly has published "Liberating the Publications of a Distinguished Scholar: A Pilot Project" in Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship.

Here's an excerpt:

Many distinguished scholars published the primary corpus of their work before the advent of online journals, which makes it more challenging to access. Upon being approached by a distinguished Emeritus Professor seeking advice about getting his work posted online, librarians at the University of Minnesota worked to gain copyright permissions to scan and upload older works to the University's Digital Conservancy (UDC). This project then uniquely took the process one step further, using the sharing option of RefWorks to make these works accessible to the widest possible audience while concurrently offering the sophisticated functionality of a citation manager. With open access repositories gaining acceptance as an authoritative long-term venue for making resources available online, including older content that can be digitized, the methods developed in this pilot project could easily be followed by others, thus greatly increasing access to older literature from distinguished scholars.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

Is It in the Public Domain?

The Samuelson Clinic has released Is It in the Public Domain?.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

Here's an excerpt:

The handbook walks readers though a series of questions—illustrated by accompanying charts—to help readers explore whether a copyrighted work from that time is in the public domain, and therefore free to be used without permission from a copyright owner. Knowing whether a work is in the public domain or protected by copyright is an important first step in any decision regarding whether or how to make use of a work.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

EU Advocate General Issues Opinion on Library Digitization

The European Union's Advocate General has issued an opinion on library digitization.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

Here's an excerpt:

Next, the Advocate General considers that the directive does not prevent Member States from granting libraries the right to digitise the books from their collections, if their being made available to the public by dedicated terminals requires it. That may be the case where it is necessary to protect original works which, although still covered by copyright, are old, fragile or rare. That may also be the case where the work in question is consulted by a large number of students and its photocopying might result in disproportionate wear.

However, Mr Jääskinen makes clear that the directive permits not the digitisation of a collection in its entirety, but only the digitisation of individual works. It is particularly important not to opt to use dedicated terminals where the sole purpose of doing so is to avoid the purchase of a sufficient number of physical copies of the work.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"Copyright Roundup 3—Changes in UK Law"

Kevin Smith has published "Copyright Roundup 3—Changes in UK Law" in Scholarly Communications @ Duke.

Here's an excerpt:

Second, the British are now adopting an exception for text and data mining into their law. This is huge, and reinforces the idea I have expressed before that libraries should be reluctant about agreeing to licensing terms around TDM; the rights are likely already held by users in many cases, so those provisions really would have the effect, despite being promoted as assisting research, of putting constraints (and sometimes added costs) on what scholars can already do. This is probably true in the U.S., where fair use likely gets us further than vendor licenses would, and it has now been made explicit in the U.K.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

Open WiFi and Copyright: A Primer for Network Operators

EFF has released Open WiFi and Copyright: A Primer for Network Operators.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

At EFF, we are big fans of open wireless. But we also know that operators of open networks sometimes worry that they could be legally responsible if people use their networks to engage in copyright infringement. We've put together a short white paper that generally explains the scope and limits of operator liability for the acts of users, and additional steps network operators may choose to take to further limit their legal risk. As we explain in the paper, copyright liability for the acts of your users is less likely than you might think, as long as you (1) simply provide a means of transmission; and (2) act reasonably and responsibly.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

WIPO Talks Collapse on Copyright Exceptions for Libraries Issue

World Intellectual Property Organization talks on copyright exceptions for libraries have collapsed over EU concerns.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Discussions by the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) Standing Committee on Copyright & Related Rights (SCCR) broke down in the early hours of Saturday morning 3 May, after the European Union (EU) attempted to block future discussion of copyright laws to aid libraries and archives fulfill their missions in the digital environment. . . .

The meeting ended in disarray at 1:30am on Saturday morning, after the EU tried to have crucial references to “text-based” work on copyright exceptions removed from the meeting conclusions—a move viewed by other Member States and library and archive NGOs present as an attempt to delay, if not derail, any progress on copyright exceptions at WIPO.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

Guarding Against Abuse: Restoring Constitutional Copyright

R Street has released Guarding Against Abuse: Restoring Constitutional Copyright.

Here's an excerpt:

Conservatives who care about the original public meaning of the Constitution must not abandon our constitutional obligation. Conservatives believe that the words of the Constitution mean something. If the words mean something, if they mean anything, then copyright must expire. . . .

Overall, we can be supporters of a copyright regime that protects and compensates creators, a noble goal, while recognizing that the current system has gone haywire. It's time to restore our founding principles and recognize that constitutional copyright would unleash new creativity and economic growth.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

“The Demand for Out-of-Print Works and Their (Un)Availability in Alternative Markets”

Paul J. Heald has self-archived “The Demand for Out-of-Print Works and Their (Un)Availability in Alternative Markets.”

Here's an excerpt:

Prior studies demonstrate the shocking unavailability of most books published in the 20th Century, prompting The Atlantic Monthly headline: How Copyright Made Mid-Century Books Vanish. The unavailability of new editions of older works would be less problematic, however, if little consumer demand existed for those works. In addition, the lack of new editions would be much less troubling if the works were easily available in alternative forms or markets. Newly collected data provides evidence of the demand for out-of-print books and then charts the availability of out-of-print works in digital form (eBooks and .mp3), in used book stores, and in public libraries. The situation with books remains dismal, although music publishers on iTunes seem to be doing a much better job of digitizing older works and making them available than do book publishers. Some theories for this discrepancy are offered.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"Can Formalities Save the Public Domain? Reconsidering Formalities for the 2010s"

Niva Elkin-Koren has published "Can Formalities Save the Public Domain? Reconsidering Formalities for the 2010s" in The Berkeley Technology Law Journal.

Here's an excerpt:

In essence, formalities advocates argue that current copyright law protects too many works, and shifting back to an opt-in regime would help restore the balance in copyright law between incentives and access. Restoring formalities would arguably expand the public domain by increasing the number of works in which copyright is not affirmatively claimed. It has been further suggested that works of unknown authorship are underused. 8 This is due to uncertainty about whether they are protected by copyright or not, which creates a chilling effect. A notice requirement would signal to potential users which works are protected by copyright. A notice would also generate the information necessary for licensing, thereby facilitating the clearance of rights and reducing the problem of orphan works.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

MOOC Content Licensing Solution Launched

The Copyright Clearance Center has Launched the MOOC Content Licensing Solution.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The MOOC Content Licensing Solution uses the current per-page or per-article academic-based pricing rightsholders have established through CCC's Electronic Course Content pay-per-use service. CCC offers digital rights from over 5,000 rightsholders around the world to public, private not-for-profit, and private for-profit U.S.-based institutions of higher education that conduct academic MOOCs.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"E-Book Platforms for Academic Librarians"

Audrey Powers has self-archived "E-Book Platforms for Academic Librarians."

Here's an excerpt:

The goal of this issue is to provide a succinct overview of e-book platforms for academic librarians as well as insights into where e-book platforms are headed in the future. Most of the authors work in academic libraries and their job responsibilities include developing, procuring, promoting, and educating users about e-books. The topics covered include an overview of e-book platforms including technical aspects and business models, lending platforms, aggregator platforms, commercial publisher platforms, and university press platforms. It is our hope that when you read these articles it will add to your knowledge base about the current and future state of e-book platforms in academic libraries.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"Orphans in Turmoil: How a Legislative Solution Can Help Put the Orphan Works Dilemma to Rest"

Vicenç Feliú has self-archived "Orphans in Turmoil: How a Legislative Solution Can Help Put the Orphan Works Dilemma to Rest" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

The orphan works issue has continued to grow in the U.S. despite strong efforts to find a workable solution. Stake holders on both sides of the issue have proposed and opposed solutions and compromises that could have alleviated the problem, and we are still no closer to an agreement. This paper posits that the solutions offered in the proposed legislation of 2006 and 2008 provide a strong working foundation for a legislative answer to the issue. To make that answer workable, a new legislative effort would have to take into account the questions raised by stakeholders to the previous legislative attempts and provide workable answers. This paper also proposes those answers can be found in the working models used by other jurisdictions attempting to solve the orphan works dilemma.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

Copyright Office Seeks Comments on Orphan Works and Mass Digitization

The US Copyright Office is seeking comments on orphan works and mass digitization and it will hold public roundtable discussions on these topics.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The United States Copyright Office will host public roundtable discussions on potential legislative solutions for orphan works and mass digitization under U.S. copyright law on March 10-11, 2014, in Washington, D.C. Requests to participate should be submitted by February 24, 2014. For a participation request form, go to http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/participation-request-form.html.

The Office is also seeking public comments on potential legislative solutions for orphan works and mass digitization under U.S. copyright law. A comment form will be posted on the Copyright Office website at http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/ no later than March 12, 2014. Comments are due by April 14, 2014, and will be posted on the Copyright Office website.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"Copyright and Inequality"

Lea Shaver has self-archived "Copyright and Inequality."

Here's an excerpt:

The prevailing theory of copyright law imagines a marketplace efficiently serving up new works to an undifferentiated world of consumers. Yet the reality is that all consumers are not equal. The majority of the world's people experience copyright law not as a boon to consumer choice, but as a barrier to acquiring knowledge and taking part in cultural life. The resulting patterns of privilege and disadvantage, moreover, reinforce and perpetuate preexisting social divides. Class and culture combine to explain who wins, and who loses, from copyright protection. . . . This article highlights and explores these relationships between copyright and social inequality, offering a new perspective on what is at stake in debates over copyright reform on issues ranging from fair use to fashion and everything in between.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"Impact of Public Domain Resources On Public Libraries in the United States"

Anne Arendt and Dustin Fife have published "Impact of Public Domain Resources On Public Libraries in the United States" in the Journal of Librarianship and Information Science.

Here's an excerpt:

Ownership and rights issues relating to electronic resources can be a source of angst, confusion and litigation. This is due in part to the automatic copyright many individuals receive, including in the United States, upon creation of an original work. However, there are options available for relaxing these rights. One of these options is Creative Commons Zero. . . . Based on the above, this document researches the awareness, complexity and effects of Creative Commons Zero and related licenses on libraries as perceived by library directors and managers across the United States. In order to accomplish this, a quantitative survey was administered in an anonymous web-based format.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

Only 20.56 % of Jounals in DOAJ Use CC BY or CC BY-SA License

The post "CC-BY Dominates under the Creative Commons licensed Journals in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)" analyzes the use of Creative Commons licences by journals in the Directory of Open Access Journals.

Here's an excerpt:

A total of 2,016 (or 20.56 %) of the guided journal in DOAJ therefore use a license (CC-BY or CC-BY-SA), which is compatible with the requirements of the Open Definition and allow a restriction-free use of the contents within the meaning of Open Access defined the Budapest Open Access Initiative, the RCUK Open Access policy and the Berlin Declaration.

If we consider the subset of journals that use any CC license that the claims of the Open Definition sufficient licenses dominate even slightly: About 54% of all journals that use a CC license , use either CC-BY ( 52.77 %) or CC-BY-SA (1.40 %). Surprisingly low is the proportion of journals which use the most restrictive CC license CC-BY-NC-ND : Only 737 journals (7.52 % of all journals and 19.80% under the CC-licensed journals). This license variant neither allows edits or allows to create derivative works (such as translations) nor a commercial use is possible. Surprisingly allow more than half (2,060, 55.35 %) of which is under a CC license Journals a commercial exploitation of the contents, only 44.65% (1662) prohibit this.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

E-print Copyright Debate Continues: "Its the Content, Not the Version!"

Kevin Smith has published "Its the Content, Not the Version!" in Scholarly Communications @ Duke.

Here's an excerpt:

Throughout this discussion, the proponents of the position that copyright is transferred only in a final version really do not make any legal arguments as such, just an assertion of what they wish were the situation (I wish it were too). But here is a legal point—the U.S. copyright law makes the difficulty with this position pretty clearly in section 202 when it states the obvious principle that copyright is distinct from any particular material object that embodies the copyrighted work. So it is simply not true to say that version A has a copyright and version B has a different copyright.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"Guest Post: Charles Oppenheim on Who Owns the Rights to Scholarly Articles"

Charles Oppenheim has published "Guest Post: Charles Oppenheim on Who Owns the Rights to Scholarly Articles" in Open and Shut.

Here's an excerpt:

Posting D [draft article] on an OA repository is the so-called "Harnad-Oppenheim" solution, first proposed by Stevan Harnad and me more than 10 years ago.

When the solution was first enunciated, publishers dismissed it for two reasons: firstly, why would anyone want to read a draft when the final perfect version can be obtained via the publisher? And secondly, it would be difficult to track down a copy of D anyway. Their comments remain valid today, though the second one is not as strong because of services such as Google Scholar. But no publisher suggested that the solution was illegal because publishers owned the copyright to D, and they were right not to do so. The law is clear that I own the copyright in D. That is why I am so puzzled that some recent non-publisher commentators seem to think publishers own the copyright in D.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"Last Sale? Libraries’ Rights in the Digital Age"

Jennifer Jenkins has published "Last Sale? Libraries' Rights in the Digital Age" in College & Research Libraries News.

Here's an excerpt:

What's the difference between a sale and license? Normally, the law is skeptical of limitations on transfers of property. Can Snickers say you merely "licensed" that candy bar because there was fine print on the label? A court would be unlikely to agree. Can libraries argue that though e-books come with "a license," the library is nevertheless an "owner" with first sale rights? The answer at the moment is "probably not."

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Scope of Fair Use Hearing

The House Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet held a hearing on the scope of fair use on 1/28/14 (video).

Here's an excerpt from "Fair Use Takes Center Stage at Judiciary Committee Hearing": :

One area that got significant attention was the topic of mass digitization, which has been repeatedly determined by courts to be a fair and transformative use. Not only is it fair, but as Professor Peter Jaszi noted during the hearing it is also tremendously beneficial, enabling the indexing and searching of huge sets of works.

Several panelists, however, pointed to the legal status of mass digitization as evidence of "fair use creep," stressing its supposed lack of "transformative" quality over the other fair use considerations. That's a mistake. Mass digitization is absolutely the sort of thing fair use is supposed to enable. Fair use is a flexible doctrine, not a rigid list of exceptions, so that it can accommodate changes in practices or technology.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"Setting the Record Straight about Elsevier"

Kevin Smith has published "Setting the Record Straight about Elsevier" in Scholarly Communications @ Duke.

Here's an excerpt:

Each [article] version is a revision of the original, and the copyright is the same for all these derivatives. When copyright is transferred to a publisher, the rights in the entire set of versions, as derivatives of one another, are included in the transfer. Authors are not allowed to use their post-prints because the rights in that version are not covered in the transfer; they are allowed to use post-prints only because the right to do so, in specified situations, is licensed back to them as part of the publication agreement.

Once a copyright transfer has been signed, all of the rights that the author may still have are because of specific contractual terms, which are usually contained in the transfer document itself. In short, these agreements usually give all of the rights under copyright to the publisher and then license back very small, carefully defined slivers of those rights back to the author. One of those slivers is often, but not always, the right to use a submitted version, or post-print, in carefully limited ways.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"’Safe Harbor’ for the Innocent Infringer in the Digital Age"

Tonya M. Evans has self-archived "'Safe Harbor' for the Innocent Infringer in the Digital Age" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

The primary goal of this Article is three-fold: (1) to explore the role of the innocent infringer archetype historically and in the digital age; (2) to highlight the tension between customary and generally accepted online uses and copyright law that compromise efficient use of technology and progress of the digital technologies, the Internet, and society at large; and (3) to offer a legislative fix in the form of safe harbor for direct innocent infringers. Such an exemption seems not only more efficient but also more just in the online environment where unwitting infringement for the average copyright consumer is far easier than ever to commit, extremely difficult to police, and often causes little, if any, cognizable market harm.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

"E-Book Monopolies and the Law"

Angela Daly has self-archived "E-Book Monopolies and the Law" in SSRN

Here's an excerpt:

This article will examine the legality of the digital rights management ("DRM") measures used by the major e-book publishers and device manufacturers in the United States, European Union and Australia not only to enforce their intellectual property rights but also to create monopolistic content silos, restrict interoperability and affect the ability for users to use the content they have bought in the way they wish. The analysis will then proceed to the recent competition investigations in the US and EU over price-fixing in e-book markets, and the current litigation against Amazon in the US for an alleged abuse of its dominant position. A final point will be made on possible responses in Australia to these issues taking into account the jurisprudence on DRM in other scenarios.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap

Safe to Be Open: Study on the Protection of Research Data and Recommendation for Access And Usage

OpenAIRE has released Safe to Be Open: Study on the Protection of Research Data and Recommendation for Access And Usage.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

This study addresses the most important legal issues when implementing an open access e-infrastructure for research data. It examines the legal requirements for different kinds of usage of research data in an open access infrastructure, such as OpenAIREplus, which links them to publications. The existing legal framework regarding potentially relevant intellectual property (IP) rights is analysed from the general European perspective as well as from that of selected EU Member States. Various examples and usage scenarios are used to explain the scope of protection of the potentially relevant IP rights. In addition different licence models are analysed in order to identify the licence that is best suited to the aim of open access, especially in the context of the infrastructure of OpenAIREplus. Based on the outcomes of these analyses, some recommendations to the European legislator as well as data- and e-infrastructure providers are given on improving the rights situation in relation to research data.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap