Libraries and IT : working papers of the Information Technology Sub-committee of the HEFCs' Libraries Review.

  • Great Britain. Higher Education Funding Council. Information Technology Sub-committee.
Date:
1993
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Libraries and IT : working papers of the Information Technology Sub-committee of the HEFCs' Libraries Review. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    218/328 (page 198)
    process, by enabling copyright works to be included in incremental electronic stores, in which they are indexed and become easily accessible, provides an added resource which makes it distinctly different from photocopying. Thus, while reproduction by photocopying of copyright materials may be controlled by one or another form of blanket collective licensing (see below), the scope offered by electro-copying makes it significantly different, and a significantly greater threat to copyright. Copyright owners are therefore likely to see it as crucially important that electro-copying does not become established as an accepted means of reproducing materials for private use (let alone for reproduction for commercial sale), and does not become confused with photocopying, or as being permitted under the various licences issued to permit photocopying on established conditions. The processes are distinctly different, and the fact that, at its simplest, electro-copying can produce a result similar to photocopying does not mean that the two processes should be seen as the same. 1.8 Potential solutions The purpose of this paper is therefore to consider the various methods that may be available for the control of electro-copying of printed materials, and also of private copying of electronic publications themselves. The ultimate solutions depend, of course, on the decisions of individual copyright owners (which term includes their licensed publishers and their assignees) as to how they wish the use of the works they have published to be controlled. The contractual terms they impose, which, under copyright law, may run with ownership and control of the work and not be limited to situations in which there is privity of contract, may range, except where copying is permitted by the very limited statutory exceptions provided by law (as to which see Appendix 1), from requiring an individual licence to be granted in each case, with no copying permitted without such licence, so that any unauthorised act of electro-copying becomes an infringement of the copyright and subject to the penalties provided by law, to including permission to make electro-copies within some form of general licence, to, in rare cases, having no objection to the free and uncontrolled making of copies. It is the conclusion of this paper, however, that over-general collective licensing would be fundamentally damaging to the interests of authors and publishers, including publishers who publish electronically, and will not find acceptance. Potential users of electro-copying should therefore take note of the facts that electro-copying is not permitted under the licences issued, for example by the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd in the United Kingdom, for the control and use of photocopying of copyright works, and that copyright owners and publishers may not be prepared to grant licences to make electro-copies at all. [The making of a simple facsimile copy, without any intervening storage of the contents, and without any downline transmission of data, through a single 'fax' machine would however generally be accepted as the equivalent of photocopying, not electro-copying] 1.9 End user licensing not automatic The situation is complicated, of course, by the fact that electro-copying of copyright materials often takes place in private and may not be detected. Further, publishers may not wish to be involved in countless applications for minor instances of electro-copying, few of which are of commercial value. A fair response to such minor applications may well be that the publisher is not prepared to grant a licence at all for such minor electro-copying, and to point the applicant to the availability of permission to make photo-copies (not stored electro-copies) of copyright works under the conditions of a CLA licence, which is specifically designed to cope with the need for minor instances of copying, and which should be adequate to meet the general needs of users for copies for private use and which do not compete fundamentally with the sale of the original published work. But the fact that infringement may be undetected should not be seen as an excuse for undertaking the