From: "Pilch, Janice T" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 21:50:22 +0000

The court did not use the term publish. The terminology was that of
making works available to users, by means of dedicated terminals,
within libraries:

"On those grounds, the Court (Fourth Chamber) hereby rules:

1.      The concept of ‘purchase or licensing terms’ provided for in
Article 5(3)(n) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects
of copyright and related rights in the information society must be
understood as requiring that the rightholder and an establishment,
such as a publicly accessible library, referred to in that provision
must have concluded a licensing agreement in respect of the work in
question that sets out the conditions in which that establishment may
use that work.

2.      Article 5(3)(n) of Directive 2001/29, read in conjunction with
Article 5(2)(c) of that directive, must be interpreted to mean that it
does not preclude Member States from granting to publicly accessible
libraries covered by those provisions the right to digitise the works
contained in their collections, if such act of reproduction is
necessary for the purpose of making those works available to users, by
means of dedicated terminals, within those establishments.

3.      Article 5(3)(n) of Directive 2001/29 must be interpreted to
mean that it does not extend to acts such as the printing out of works
on paper or their storage on a USB stick, carried out by users from
dedicated terminals installed in publicly accessible libraries covered
by that provision. However, such acts may, if appropriate, be
authorised under national legislation transposing the exceptions or
limitations provided for in Article 5(2)(a) or (b) of that directive
provided that, in each individual case, the conditions laid down by
those provisions are met."

Best,

Janice Pilch
Copyright and Licensing Librarian
Rutgers University Libraries
Email: [log in to unmask]
________________________________________

From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 11:13:33 -0500

Did the court really use the word "publish" in describing what
libraries could do? Providing access on site through dedicated
terminals doesn't sound like what "publish? normally means.

Sandy Thatcher



> From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 12:19:09 -0400
>
> September 11, 2014, 6:19 AM - European libraries may digitize books
> and make them available at electronic reading points without first
> gaining consent of the copyright holder, the highest European Union
> court ruled Thursday.
>
> "The right of libraries to communicate, by dedicated terminals, the
> works they hold in their collections would risk being rendered largely
> meaningless, or indeed ineffective, if they did not have an ancillary
> right to digitize the works in question," the court said.
>
> Even if the rights holder offers a library the possibility of
> licensing his works on appropriate terms, the library can use the
> exception to publish works on electronic terminals, the court ruled.
> "Otherwise, the library could not realize its core mission or promote
> the public interest in promoting research and private study," it said.
>
> However, libraries cannot permit visitors to use the terminals to
> print out the works or store them on a USB stick, the CJEU said. By
> doing so, the visitor reproduces the work by making a new copy. This
> copying is not covered by the exception, particularly since the copies
> are made by individuals and not by the library itself, it said.
>
> http://www.itworld.com/it-management/435674/libraries-may-digitize-books-without-permission-eu-top-court-rules
>
> See also some caveats in IP Watch:
>
> http://www.ip-watch.org/2014/09/11/libraries-may-be-permitted-to-digitise-books-without-copyright-owners-consent-eu-high-court-rules/