From: Gretchen McCord <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 11:03:13 -0600

My concern is with the works that are NOT created because of a law
that simply doesn't fit the current technological world. See the many
CMSI studies finding widespread misunderstanding of copyright law,
particularly fair use, across a range of industries. True, the studies
cite misunderstanding of the law, not bad law per se, but when any law
is so widely misunderstood that the result is undermining of the
original purpose of the law, I say the law at the least badly written
and likely insufficient.

http://www.cmsimpact.org/fair-use

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Gretchen McCord MSIS, JD
[log in to unmask]


On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 11:46 AM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: "Jim O'Donnell" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 21:13:10 -0700
>
> The simplest thing to say is that the following posting claims that
> "there is no question" and "We all know this" are demonstrated to be
> untrue by this very thread of this conversation.  And if copyright
> were indeed failing to promote the creation of new works and the
> expansion of the body of human knowledge, it's unlikely that there
> would be 47 million articles for SciHub to think worth stealing.  I've
> got something like 46,955,000 of them still to read, myself.
>
> Jim O'Donnell
> ASU