|
 | Bills Move Quickly, but Can Meaningful Orphan Works Legislation Pass?
A Senate bill to address orphan works easily passed committee late last week, but while that bill has earned the somewhat tepid support of the library community, a number of associations—mainly representing photographers, artists, and illustrators—are strongly opposing it and urging members to push for its defeat. According to Public Knowledge’s Alex Curtis, who blogged the mark-up session, S. 2913, the Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act of 2008, passed the Senate committee with relative ease. Its passage, however, now sets up a showdown between competing bills—and, as is usually the case with all things copyright—that showdown has drawn sharp battle lines.
Yesterday, the American Society of Media Photographers (ASMP) issued a call for members to oppose the Senate bill, saying it “may encourage widespread infringement of photographers’ copyrighted work if it becomes law.” Artists and illustrators also joined in vocal opposition last week. Family Circus creator and Houston Chronicle cartoonist Nick Anderson even put his opposition into a hyperbolic image: a copyright symbol going down the toilet.
On his blog Anderson, who is also president of the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists, told readers the orphan works bill would “let anyone who can’t find me (or who removes my name from my work and says he can’t) to infringe my work,” adding that the bill, if passed, would mean that his work “could be stolen countless times, but I might never find out about it.” Anderson said he supports the goal of making “truly orphaned works (that is, ones by deceased authors) available for use by museums and archivists” but that the current bills are written so broadly they would “almost certainly unleash a torrent of mischief by unscrupulous infringers, with little to fear in the way of legal consequences.”
What unifies opposing factions, however, is that neither side seems satisfied with either bill. An ASMP FAQ on the issue says that, in the photography industry, “the Senate version of the bill is being actively opposed, although the congressional version is being grudgingly accepted.” Meanwhile, supporters of the Senate bill—which includes libraries, publishers, and public advocacy groups like Public Knowledge—are opposed to the House legislation. In a letter to lawmakers, librarians voiced in “unequivocal terms” their opposition to the House bill, saying its provisions will create burdens that will “provide no additional protection for owners but will impose costs so great on noncommercial users that they simply will not employ the orphan works provision.”
Resolving the two competing bills will now require serious negotiation, since both sides also appear to agree on another point: that passage of an orphan works bill is all but imminent. “There is tremendous pressure on Congress to adopt an orphan works bill,” notes the ASMP FAQ point on why the organization is supporting a House bill it does not really want. “Writing a letter telling Congress to reject any bill is a mistake at this point. No matter what we do, orphan works legislation will eventually pass. If we manage to stop the current House bill, future legislation will inevitably be worse for us.”
In a post on Duke University’s Scholarly Communication Blog, scholarly communication officer Kevin Smith writes that he is “inclined to think of these bills as half-full glasses.” At best, he suggests, the bills may do some good, and at worse they are likely to do no harm, given the current state of orphan works. “I think many libraries will take the necessary trouble when the content and the opportunity seem worthwhile,” Smith writes. “Restrictive rules will help only small digitization projects, of course, which may be the point, but even so, the digital environment could be greatly enriched.”
|
|
PRO IP Bill Overwhelmingly Passes in House
The “Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008,” commonly known as the PRO-IP Act, passed overwhelmingly in the House of Representatives on May 9, just days after passing the House judiciary committee. The bill, lobbied for heavily by the entertainment industry and opposed strongly by librarians, public watchdog groups, and the technology sector, passed by a whopping 408-11 margin.
If passed into law, the bill would strengthen penalties for copyright infringements, both civil and criminal; would establish a cabinet-level position in the White House to advise the president; and would create a special division within the Department of Justice (DOJ) for enforcement of intellectual property laws. The bill, however, seems to have little or no momentum in the Senate, and a Senate version of PRO-IP has yet to be introduced. If the bill does not pass this year—and experts say that, given the election year politics, passage is not likely—the process will have to begin again. Beyond the legislative calendar, the bill faces some significant hurdles. For example, at a hearing late last year, the DOJ expressed reservations over the bill’s new enforcement provisions.
|
| St. John’s To Renovate Queens Campus Library
Beginning this summer, St. John’s University’s Queens campus will undergo a sweeping $14 million renovation of its 1960s library, located in St. Augustine Hall. Work is scheduled to begin around Memorial Day weekend and continue through the summer, with the library expected to be open for business at the end of September.
University officials said the renovations will include a “relocated, centralized reference desk” at the entry to the third floor and a “reconfiguration” of library space to provide more quiet study space—something that students have specifically requested—with seating for 500. Open stack areas will be located at the center of each floor, where several “consultation rooms” will be available for students and faculty to meet. In addition, the plan also calls for more office space for library faculty and staff, as well as “student multi-functional computer labs and classrooms.” Some departments—notably the Archives and Special Collections, Preservation, and the Periodicals office—will move to the basement level.
“In surveys, meetings and one-on-one conversations with students, faculty and library administration, the vision for a new library has come into focus, “ St. John’s executive VP and COO James Pellow said in a release. “Our intent in undertaking this project is primarily to better serve our students and to bring faculty together at the center of the campus.”
Pellow said St. Johns used a number of area colleges—including Iona, the College of New Rochelle, and Fordham—to “benchmark” the library renovation before committing to a design. The design was also motivated by work done by Vice Provost and Dean of University Information Resources and Libraries James Benson, who noted “a profound transformation in the use of information in libraries.” Benson said this transformation creates “two contrasting needs for the redesign of libraries. The first is to transform storage space for paper-based materials into collaboration enabling space for people. The second is to bring users of paper-based information resources closer to the paper that they use in future facilities such as the proposed Humanities Center.”
University officials said the project would also take advantage of “green” building developments, with “reducing its carbon footprint” also playing a large part in the redesign. The renovation will include “a high efficiency lighting system…increased utilization of natural sunlight…an upgrade of the air-conditioning,” and recycled material used throughout, including compact shelving made of 100 percent recycled metal and new carpet tiles made from recycled materials. In addition, the university is also specifying that “construction materials manufactured within 500 miles” be used.
|
| Senators Ask FBI About National Security Letters
Six U.S. Senators, Democrats and Republicans, are questioning
FBI director Robert Mueller about the National Security Letter (NSL) served on the Internet Archive (IA) last fall. Backed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the IA successfully challenged the constitutionality of the NSL in federal court. The settlement, however, in which the FBI agreed to withdraw the letter and make documents public, did not address some of the underlying issues raised in the lawsuit. That led the Senators to seek some oversight over a process that is essentially self-regulated, since the FBI does not need judicial approval to issue an NSL or to impose a gag order on recipients, though the recipient may ask a court to modify or set aside the gag order.
Specifically, the Senators asked whether the FBI believes the Internet Archive provides “an electronic communication service,” thus rendering it subject to the NSL. The Internet Archive, and other libraries, say they are not such a service. The Senators also asked Mueller if the FBI has issued any guidance regarding such a service, currently defined as “any service which provides to users thereof the ability to send or receive wire or electronic communications.” The Senators also asked if the issuance of the NSL was been reported to the FBI General Counsel and the Intelligence Oversight Board.
Those signing the letter were Russell Feingold (D-WI), who was the only Senator to oppose the expansion of the USA PATRIOT Act that enhanced FBI power over NSLs; John Sununu (R-NH); Richard Durbin (D-IL); Lisa Murkowski (R-AK); Ken Salazar (D-CO); and Chuck Hagel (R-NE). Meanwhile, the Center for Democracy and Technology called for new oversight regarding NSLs, supporting pending bills that would tighten standards to prevent fishing expeditions, impose a time limit and tighter requirements on gag orders, and tighten the definition of those subject to NSLs.
|
Library Journal Academic Newswire
Contributing Editor: Andrew R. Albanese
Phone: 646-746-6852 E-mail: aalbanese@reedbusiness.com
Editor: Francine Fialkoff
Phone: 646-746-6807 E-mail: fialkoff@reedbusiness.com
Executive Editor: Rebecca Miller
Phone: 646-746-6725 E-mail: miller@reedbusiness.com
News Editor: Norman Oder
Phone: 646-746-6829 E-mail: noder@reedbusiness.com
TO UNSUBSCRIBE
To unsubscribe send an e-mail to Unsub_Academic_Newswire@email.libraryjournal.com
TO SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to Academic Newswire or our other newsletters
Subscribe to Library Journal magazine
ARCHIVE
Read past issues
PRINT
You must change your print settings from portrait to landscape to print this page.
VIEW OUR PRIVACY POLICY
Click here
QUESTIONS?
If you need further assistance with your newsletter subscription, please contact our Online Support Staff.
Send editorial questions about this newsletter to: aalbanese@reedbusiness.com.
RBInteractive: onlineads@reedbusiness.com, (888) 7RBI-WEB.
PRIVACY MANAGER: privacymanager@reedbusiness.com
Reed Business Information 2000 Clearwater Drive Oak Brook, IL 60523 | Fax: 630-288-8394
© 2007 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2008 Library Journal. All rights reserved.
"Library Journal" is a registered trademark. "Library Journal Academic Newswire" is a trademark.
|
