TRLN Copyright Seminar
Series III: Special Collections Materials

Creation of digital collections, or What can we do with the stuff?

In our well-intentioned efforts to broaden access by digitizing content--including materials still protected under copyright--are we shirking our ethical and legal responsibilities to respect intellectual property rights?

If we adhere to copyright primarily when it serves our purpose and manipulate it to reach desired ends when the outcome is less clear, are we undermining our implicit credibility as a neutral party in the negotiation of interests between information seekers and rights holders?

If our interpretation of fair use depends on whether we are wearing our "copyright holder" hat vs. our "copyright user" hat, are we damaging our ability to advocate persuasively in public and legal forums on behalf of information seekers' interests?

Under what circumstances, if any, is it appropriate to assert copyright ownership in works (known copyright holder, unknown copyright holder, public domain works) merely because you have digitized them?

How can we reconcile our wish to extend access through digitization with both the legal requirements and the inability to locate copyright holders? Is a risk management approach to digitizing orphaned works ethical?

Assume I wrote and published a book (I hold the copyright which is still in effect) and a large academic library has a print copy of it. This library allows a commercial entity to digitize my work without my permission. They say my work is an "orphan work" because they have failed to locate me. The commercial entity is going to sell access to my work. I can stop this if I object. But I'm dead and my children (all married females) don't know much about copyright.

  • How is copying my entire book and selling it not a copyright infringement?

  • Why isn't the library that facilitated this copying not a contributory infringer?

  • Where is it written that I must police my work for infringements or lose my copyright?

  • What law changed the burden from users having to ask permission before copying an entire book to the copyright holder having to object before it can be stopped?

  • If the copyright holder (me or rather, my heirs) can't even require users to ask permission before digitizing their work, how can a library special collections department, holding large amounts of "orphan works", require users to ask it for permission for every new use?