From: Sean Johnson Andrews <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 17:17:41 -0500

This sounds like one of those, "so have you stopped beating your
wife?" kinds of questions.  Your framing of the issue largely misses
the point. The mission of academic libraries is not to pay rentier
lobby groups extortion money for questionable legal protections; it is
to use scarce resources providing access to their patrons to the
content they often helped produce. Perhaps these two goals aren't
mutually exclusive, but in this case they seem to be.

Seeing as many of the items with those "legitimate copyrights" were
produced by members of that academic community, it's a bit sly to act
like providing "fair use" access (rather than, in the present case,
paying for it three or four times over at an 800% markup) to that
material should be an abrogation of their rights. But I suppose this
will continue to be the controversy on which the entire scholarly
communication endeavor pivots.

Dreaming of a detente,
Sean


On Apr 26, 2012, at 4:05 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Sally Morris <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:49:17 +0100
>
> Forgive me if I'm missing something, but exactly what is wrong with
> defending the legitimate copyrights of publishers and their authors?
>
> Sally
>
>
> Sally Morris
> Email:  [log in to unmask]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Heather Morrison <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:16:04 -0700
>
> Further to the bizarre developments in Canada with Access Copyright, note
> that Access Copyright describes itself as a global organization, as a member
> of the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organizations.
>
> From the Access Copyright website:
>
> Access Copyright is a member of the International Federation of Reproduction
> Rights Organizations (IFRRO). IFRRO's purpose is to facilitate, on an
> international basis, the collective management of reproduction and other
> rights relevant to copyright protected works through the co-operation of
> national Reproduction Rights Organizations (RROs).
>
> Through growing relationships with other copyright collectives (associations
> that collect royalty payments on behalf of copyright holders), Access
> Copyright has truly become a global organization.
>
> Our reciprocal agreements with other copyright collectives across the globe
> have created a network of international licences, which means our affiliates
> receive royalties when their works are copied not only in Canada, but in
> other jurisdictions around the world. Any royalties attributed to Canadian
> creators and publishers for works copied in other countries (with whom we
> have agreements) are forwarded to Canadian creators and publishers via
> Access Copyright.
>
> from:
> http://www.accesscopyright.ca/about-us/international-network/
>
> Comment: developments in copyright are increasingly relevant to all of us.
> Behind the scenes, it is largely the same overlapping set of players who are
> advocating for limiting copyright, whether their focus is Georgia State, the
> Research Works Act, or Canadian universities.
>
> One of these international players is the International Association of
> Scientific, Medical and Technical Publishers (STM). From the Introduction to
> the STM Copyright webpage:
>
> The Aims of the Copyright & Legal Affairs Committee
>
> To pursue, within the limits of the STM Association's aims and objectives,
> the highest possible level of international protection of copyright works
> and of the services of publishers in making these works available
>
> What do I get from STM? What we do
>
> Copyright, Legal & Legislative Efforts
>
>        • Defence of publisher and rights-holder positions in
> precedent-setting copyright disputes and proposed government legislation
>
>  Recent actions
>
>        • Advocacy to promote UK Digital Economy Act for better copyright
> enforcement - but without passing provisions that would have led to
> over-broad extended collective licensing
>        • Advocacy for strong copyright laws in Canada, Brazil, India.
> Slowed Canadian Bill C-32 until Bill fell in elections; forced Brazilian
> copyright act to go back to drawing board; partial success in India
>
> From:
> http://www.stm-assoc.org/copyright-legal-introduction/
>
> best,
>
> Heather G. Morrison