Likely candidate for the Steven Whitaker, CRM "I Hate Paper!" Award may be a
bit lighter in the pocketbook based on how much they hated paper.  

Now, before the vitriolic spews begin, please don't get me wrong... I think
the concept of scanning out of print books to make the content available to
a larger audience is a commendable effort, Lord knows many of us have fought
the battle of attempting to locate some of these and paid exorbitant amounts
to purchase them.  But it's a shame that trough all of this, no legal
decision was made on the "fair use" issue.

Many have wondered how this all works... here are some examples:

- you buy a CD or LP (for some people, like Sharon and I who know what they
are!) and you copy it to a hard drive, cassette (for some who know what
THOSE were) and then you sell the original source item.  

Did you just bust the license agreement?  My understanding is with CDs, you
can buy it, copy it, and then use one or the other under fair use, but if
you sell the original, you no longer possess the license to use the "burned"
copy.

- same scenario, with a movie

- Now with a book, I know you can buy it and copy a section to re-use if you
give proper attribution, and if it's used in a "for profit" situation you
need to secure publisher/author approval first, but what about if you then
sell it

Are you no longer allowed to exercise "fair use" because you don't own the
source material?

Part of the argument (with movies and music, at least) seems to be that the
artists don't get any 'ka-ching!' off of the resold material and now
multiple people have access to their material, but the same is true with
used books (I would think) No one makes any money off the copy that's resold
to another party.

Larry

http://snipurl.com/4tedb  [www_nytimes_com] 

“On the one hand, one admires all of Google’s inventions,” said Rick
Prelinger, board president of the Internet Archive, a nonprofit organization
that has scanned and made available online one million public domain books.
“But when you start to see a single point of access developing for world
culture, by default, it is disturbing.”

The settlement of the lawsuits, which were filed in 2005, did not resolve
the question of whether Google’s unauthorized scanning of copyrighted books
was permissible under copyright law.

Still, publishers were claiming victory, noting that under the settlement,
publishers and authors must give permission for snippets of their in-print
books to be included in Google’s search program. Google had argued that
under the “fair use” doctrine of copyright law, it did not need such
permission. 

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]