Associate Professor Matthew Sag, Loyola University of Chicago School of Law Slides available at www.matthewsag.comwww.matthewsag.com.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 19 Agency and Liability to Third Parties.
Advertisements

Overview Fair use 20-year rule Permission Orphans Decision-makers Fair Use and digitization projects Archives, Rare Books and Special Collections Georgia.
PUBLICATIONS BOARD REPORT Joe Konstan SGB Publications Advisor.
1 Coase, Theory of the Firm, Tirole chapter 0 Eric Rasmusen, G604, Tirole-Coasle, size of firms, 14 November,
1 Licences for Europe Working Group 3 Sub-group: Scope of potential for the WG to promote solutions with regard to television archives Helen Keefe, April.
1 ITU Interconnection Workshop 17 August 2001 Role of the Regulator K S Wong Office of the Telecommunications Authority Hong Kong, China.
Addition Facts
WIPO Study on Copyright Limitations and Exceptions for the Visually Impaired Prepared by Judith Sullivan, Consultant, Copyright and Public Affairs.
Copyright and Mass-Digitization: The strategic importance of data-mining Presentation Details Matthew Sag Professor of Law Loyola University of Chicago.
Chapter Four: The Sale of Goods 1. The Sale of Goods Act 1979 in Britain: Britain The Sale of Goods Act 1979 regulates contracts in which goods are sold.
Jeffrey P. Cunard CAA Counsel Debevoise & Plimpton February 22, 2003 Getting an Art Journal Online: JSTOR and the Art Bulletin © 2003 Debevoise & Plimpton.
Copyright © Texas Education Agency, All rights reserved. Marketing Dynamics 1.
Creation of Offers Copyright © Texas Education Agency, All rights reserved.
1 The information industry and the information market Summary.
COPYRIGHT BASICS Linda Sharp Marsha Stevenson
Their relationship and attendant issues 1. Shareholders are the owners, but directors’ duties are to the company – not to any particular class of stakeholders.
Addition 1’s to 20.
Week 1.
Copyright Trolling An Empirical Study of “John Doe” Litigation Prof. Matthew Sag, Loyola University Chicago School of Law July 10, 2014.
© 2007 BST. All rights reserved. Confidential Information. SLU – 1 PDS_139 (0503) L2 Applying Problem- Solving Tools.
UK Copyright Reform: Implications for information services in HE and FE Chris Morrison Copyright and Licensing Compliance Officer University of Kent ©
Copyright and Digital Cultural Heritage
Chapter 1 The Legal Environment
Copyright Basics for Faculty RVC Faculty Development Day April 21, 2011 Presented by Brent Eckert Technical Services Librarian.
Copyright in Scholarship Gail Digital Research & Scholarship.
Intellectual Property UCLA DIS “Information Ecology” C.Hoda,Fall 2008.
Cornell Institute for Digital Collections Intellectual Property: Introduction to Copyright Peter B. Hirtle Director Cornell Institute for Digital Collections.
08/21/091 Copyright Basics Or What's With All the Legal Stuff??? Tour Smart PLUS Chicago, Illinois July 24, 2010.
April 7, 2011 Copyright Law. Copyright Infringement?
Cornell Institute for Digital Collections 1 Copyright and Distributed Learning Peter B. Hirtle Director Cornell Institute for Digital Collections
Everyday Copyright How does copyright impact my teaching & research? Slides produced by the Copyright Education & Consultation Program.
New copyright challenges for the users digital works Dragutin Nemec Library of the Faculty of law in Zagreb LIBRARIES IN THE DIGITAL AGE (LIDA) 2007.
Right to use copyright protected research and other materials Pirjo Kontkanen NUAS seminar Forskning – Arkiv - Forskning Legal Counsel / Research.
Examples of problems with teacher/school site violations: A company’s logo and link on footer of homepage when company is not their business partner—only.
Copyright in the Digital Age October 14, 2004 FEDLINK Membership Meeting Carrie Russell, Copyright Specialist ALA Office for Information Technology Policy.
Copyright Your rights, the law, and the rights of others.
Associate Professor Matthew Sag, Loyola University of Chicago School of Law Slides available at DRAFT – Check against.
1 herbert van de sompel CS 502 Computing Methods for Digital Libraries Cornell University – Computer Science Herbert Van de Sompel
CREATING DIGITAL LIBRARIES: A COLLISION COURSE WITH COPYRIGHT LAW Lolly Gasaway November 2011.
Legal and Business Considerations of Legislating Collective Rights in the U.S. Lois F. Wasoff Kernochan Center Symposium 2011.
Ompulsory ollectives ommand aution Intellectual Property Scholars Conference 2013 Professor Matthew Sag ©
ICOLC October 2008 Digitising in copyright material: soft law approach to mass digitisation
Fair Use In The Digital Age: The Ongoing Influence of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose’s “Transformative Use Test” Campbell v. Acuff-Rose and the Future of Digital.
Professor Ian Hargreaves – where are we now? A Law Firm Specialising in Intellectual Property and Information Technology.
Breana McCracken University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign HathiTrust and Copyright Future Implications - Strong precedent for libraries to continue to.
Using Copyrighted Works Do I need permission to use this? Slides produced by the Copyright Education & Consultation Program.
Copyright Basics Fundamentals you should know Slides produced by the Copyright Education & Consultation Program.
The Quest for Copyright Understanding Miguel Guhlin
Chapter 17-Content and Talent. Overview Introduction to content. Rights required for using content. Using content. Using talent.
Intellectual Property: Introduction to Copyright Peter B. Hirtle Intellectual Property Officer Cornell University Library
Copyright proposals 2013 CS 275B/Mus 254 Stanford University.
Becky Albitz Electronic Resources Librarian
“Copyright and Terms of Service Copyright © Texas Education Agency. The materials found on this website are copyrighted © and trademarked ™ as the property.
Copyright Law A Guide for Educators. Jolene Hartnett, RDH, BS Seattle Central College © 2015 Certain materials in this program are included under the.
Getting Permission When Your Use is Not Fair Slides produced by the Copyright Education & Consultation Program.
Innovation, Copyright, and the Academy University of California Santa Barbara November 2, 2015 Kenneth D. Crews Gipson Hoffman & Pancione (Los Angeles)
Copyright Basics for Educators Charles Crowley - EDTC Fall Evans.
Copyright for teaching. 2 katelyncollins/category/week-5 CC BY.
By: Georgina Salas EDTC What is Copyright?? The exclusive legal right, given to an originator or an assignee to print, publish, perform, film,
 December 2004 announcement by Google of the Project  August 2005 announcement of the “opt-out” policy  September-October 2005 lawsuit  October 2008.
Digital Libraries: Threat to Copyright? Denise Troll Covey Principal Librarian for Special Projects Carnegie Mellon 3 rd International Conference on Digital.
Disclaimer This presentation is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Linda K. Enghagen, J.D., Professor Isenberg School of Management
Margaret Burnett April 2017
Copyright Issues associated with the Regents’ On-Line Degree Program
Fair Use in the Classroom
Do I need permission to use this?
Fair Use and Educational Materials
Copyright Basics for Educators Charles Crowley - EDTC Fall Evans
The Variety of Reports in Business
Presentation transcript:

Associate Professor Matthew Sag, Loyola University of Chicago School of Law Slides available at

The orphan works problem Use of copyrighted works is not intrinsically harmful Cost of getting permission > value of use > 0 – Copyright status uncertain – Author/publisher contracts unclear, private/public records faulty, interests pass by contract, will, intestacy, merger, sale, bankruptcy, … Cost of use without permission > value of use > 0 – Threat of attorney fees, statutory damages, class actions! 2

Is there still an Orphan Works Problem? Judge Baer in Authors Guild v. HathiTrust Print-Disabled Access Search Computational analysis e.g. text mining –I cannot imagine a definition of fair use that would not encompass the transformative uses made by Defendants MDP and would require that I terminate this invaluable contribution to the progress of science and cultivation of the arts that at the same time effectuates the ideals espoused by the ADA. 3

Copyright & Non-Expressive Use Copyright law does not prevent library digitization for the purpose of non-expressive use. See my previous work, e.g. Copyright and Copy-Reliant Technology (2009) Copyright and Copy-Reliant Technology Orphan Works as Grist for the Data Mill (2012) Orphan Works as Grist for the Data Mill Digital Archives: Dont Let Copyright Block Data Mining* 490 Nature (October 4, 2012) Digital Archives: Dont Let Copyright Block Data Mining Digital Humanities amicus brief in Authors Guild v. HathiTrust, and __ v. Google* Digital Humanities amicus brief District Judge Harold Baer, Jr., decision in Authors Guild v. HathiTrustHarold BaerAuthors Guild v. HathiTrust 4 * with Matthew Jockers and Jason Schultz

Digitization and Computational Freedom The importance of search and disabled access are self- evident. What about the Digital Humanities? Discovery of new works Observation of patterns Study literature in broader context 5

Google Ngram Visualization Comparing Frequency of The United States is to The United States are 6 As cited in Authors Guild v. HathiTrust 2012

7 American Slavery in American, English, and Irish Literature, Matthew Jockers, Macroanalysis: Digital Methods for Literary History (forthcoming February 2013) Proportion of Irish Literature with a topic ofslavery spikes ~

Yes, There is still an orphan works problem 8

The Copyright Offices Renewed Interest in Orphan Works – Some Concerns (1) Case law has unblocked some of the most significant orphan works issues (ADA, Non-expressive use, Search) – Proposed solutions to the orphan works problem might be a retrograde step – See Jennifer Urban for a discussion of why an orphan works program may be fair use. The fair use solution is obscured by talk of ECL and statutory fixes. 9

(2) The use of copyrighted works is not malum in se –Solutions that focus on preventing/taxing use without corresponding tangible benefits to rights holders make no sense. (Ariel Katz has much to say on this) (3) Collective licensing and compulsory licensing are difficult to get right – See generally, Peter DiCola & Matthew Sag An Information- Gathering Approach to Copyright Policy 2012.An Information- Gathering Approach to Copyright Policy 10

Would a compulsory license for expressive use of orphan works actually work? Three Questions Who receives compensation? For what uses? At what price or under what price-setting mechanism? 11

Who receives compensation? Copyright owners Author or publisher? Rough & ready division as in the Google Book Search ASA? Arbitration system to quickly settle issues? What to do with unclaimed funds? A tax on reading is not a virtue of it self Moral hazard for collection agency 12

For what uses? Should we roll-back current fair uses? E.g. digitization for search, non-expressive uses in general, print-disabled access? Should we raise a levy on things that might be fair use? Transaction cost fair uses Positive spill-over fair uses Use outside proper scope of copyright monopoly fair uses – non-profit, educational, private study, Should we limit to things hard to justify as fair use? 20% previews, full-access, ebook? 13

At what price/price-setting mechanism? Fixed fee as in the cover license Congress, Copyright Office, Magic 8-Ball? If you propose a complex arbitration proceeding as in Webcasting, you need a decision standard Willing-buyer, willing-seller –> arbitrary results. – There is no market for permissions in orphan works – Ignores public interest in improved access library collections – Ignores public interest in public domain works likely to be mistaken as orphan works. Reasonable expectations, Investment backed expectations, Fair remuneration, Fair profit-sharing? Public interest? 14

Adversarial rate-setting process? Relies on the parties for information – but orphan works rights holders are not parties! Favors incumbents with institutional expertise Agree or arbitrate framework Would be even more insane in the orphan works context than in webcasting No representation of the public interest The court in Authors Guild v Google rejected private agreement in the form of the ASA for good reasons. Why trust private agreement in an arbitration context? 15

My Broader Concern Many proposed solutions will be overly centralizing Leading to either log-jam or capture in the Copyright Office, or A collective rights organization monopoly power and no regard for the public interest We need decentralizing solutions! 16

17 Collective licensing sorts out and creates standardization Roy Kaufman, Copyright Clearance Center at the In Re Books Conference on Friday License Some rights reserved by ndrwfggSome rights reservedndrwfgg License Some rights reserved by FordanSome rights reservedFordan

18 Terrestrial radio simulcasts, Pandora Apple, Spotify Before the Digital Audio Transmission right Emerging experimental ecosystem After 3 different arbitrations and 6? Legislative reboots

Real Orphan Works Reform De-Orphaning Digitizing records Legal decision-making tools, e.g. Elizabeth Townsend-Gards Durationator project For the Orphans that remain, most Proposals aimed at the first half of the Problem Cost of getting permission > value of use > 0 19

Real orphan works reform would focus on the second half of the orphan works problem Cost of use without permission > value of use > 0 No attorney fees, statutory damages, for good faith use No class actions against good faith use Broad definition of good faith commercial, reasonable effort to locate RH and determine whether use would be approved Presumption in favor of use for works published between 1923 and 1977 unless the rights holder notifies the Copyright Office to the contrary Presumption in favor of use for unpublished works if the author is unknown or deceased. 20