Copyright Clearance Center lawsuit against University Libraries; rapped over financing CCC used specious defence of his actions

Earlier we reported that the Copyright Clearance Center financing litigation against University Libraries was. It seemed strange for me at the time that the CCC was to promote cooperation in different copyright, but in truth, active litigation against the financing was very parties you with work wanted.

Now, Publishers Weekly is reporting that the Association of research libraries complain about this.

A controversial copyright case e reserves in university libraries has grown a little more tense.PW has learned that the Association of research libraries (ARL) sent a letter to the Copyright Clearance Center, its role in financing a current Publisher lawsuit against four people at Georgia State University on the use of electronic course content protestieren.In sent a letter to CCC CEO Tracey Armstrong expressed ARL Director Charles Lowry "deep disappointment at the decision by the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), to draw 50% of the applicant in the proceedings." Lowry noted that the library only by CCC learned the key role in the action after it, District Court in Atlanta was revealed in a footnote in a recent ruling by judge Orinda Evans of the Federal.

Writing Lowry points that CCC was founded as "a collaboration between content creators, content publishers and content users." In fact, the non-profit of CCC's revenues come a considerable part from academic libraries. Since learning of CCC's role in the HSE e reserve case, have some librarians on the idea of bristles that have helped your fees, a lawsuit against you pressure to finance, especially at a time of extreme budget.

While Lowry, who admitted "Balance of interests" of the publishers and users "can be a challenging task", he suggested to support CCC given its central role as a moderator, "Collaboration," rather than litigation. "This action by the CCC signals for the content of user community, CCC will no longer serve the interests of all partners in the scientific communication groups." Lowry urged the CCC "forward to rethink its role of financing is the litigation."

In response, the CCC says that it tried to clarify fair use argument is obviously specious beitragen.Dieses.CCC is financing a dispute by a major publisher.If really means what you said, why you the other side - funds libraries funds not.The result, clarification of the fair use would be still the same.Instead you chose the route that success would make the way the libraries smaller.

"It makes one think about the relationship of the CCC to Verlagen.Deutlich bags are in the Publisher and all your talk of"facilitate licensing"is bullshit. what you really want to do is an enforcement agency geworden.Als corporate lawyer (Emeritus) from this point forward I recommend my clients certainly handle the CCC as an adversary and suggest that you be very careful in any future use of the Center.""All you can say and used against you" is to keep the maxim in mind, now that the CCC has revealed his true bias.

View the original article here

Reading Ebooks Against the Clock

I've been reading at a frantic pace all afternoon - but not for a reason I like.

For the second time in the past few months, I've had to rush through an ebook so that I could finish it before it disappeared from my Sony Reader. It's not the Reader's fault; it's a fluke in the way the Harris County public library system regulates the use of its ebooks. Keep in mind that there are about 4 million people in this county (almost one of every six Texans lives in Harris County, in fact), so it almost always takes at least two weeks to gain access to one of the system's electronic books.

Because of the high demand for what seems to be a rather limited number of ebook copies, the library does not allow an extension of time for downloaded ebooks. That means the clock begins ticking as soon as a patron's download is finished and, after fourteen 24-hour periods, the book is killed regardless of what page a reader might be on. I get that and I undertand why it has to be that way right now. But, for at least the third time now, I have gone weeks with no checked-out ebooks only to have two or three of them become available to me simultaneously. Because the ebooks are available for just three days after patron notification, that means they have to be read within 16 or 17 days, at most.

I'm not a great fan of ebooks but I do enjoy the opportunity to download books from my library. Unfortunately, demand seems to be outpacing supply of ebooks in the Harris County system at a time when libraries are struggling to balance budgets while putting books, CDs and DVDs on the shelves.

I have mixed emotions about the whole thing, I have to admit. If the supply of ebooks can be increased only by cutting the number of real books on the shelves, is this a good thing? My vote is a definite NO.

As it turns out, I am not particularly thrilled by Mexico City Noir, a short story collection of crime fiction set in that city, and I wonder if my opinion was tainted by my rushed reading of the dozen stories in the collection. Reading against the clock is not an experience I want to repeat any time soon.Posted bySam Sattlerat3:53 PM

View the Original article