From: Jessica Rosner [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Question on Site license agreement - ABC News video
Ok I should NOT fall for this but one last response
OF COURSE COPYRIGHT IS A MONOPLY , people who create ( or pay others to
a UNIQUE piece of work ARE THE OWNERS of this work. We can argue whether 95
is an unfair amount of time to protect Mickey Mouse but if a person writes
a book, or a company makes a film IT IS THEIRS. They can charge what they
want for it and you don't have to buy it or see it if you don't think the
price is fair.
Congratulations Jed you are the first person that every made me side with
on a copyright question
( No Dennis this DOES not mean I am going to root for the Mets, some things
-- Jessica Rosner Kino International 333 W 39th St. 503 NY NY 10018 email@example.com 212-629-6880
From: "Jed Horovitz" <JedH@internetvideoarchive.com> Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 12:41:31 -0400 To: <email@example.com> Subject: RE: [Videolib] Question on Site license agreement - ABC News video
Thanks. Your attitude that works are not fungible in any way is perfect proof that copyright is a monopoly and should be thus regulated.
On a practicle level (and at a university where you are supporting professors and researchers) I am sure there are situations where items are not fungible BUT for the librarian building a collection (as opposed to filling a request) the option is always there. Not everybody has the same constraints and for those who don't the only thing that a large corporation understands is when you vote with your $$$.
[Jed Horovitz] -----Original Message----- From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of Gary Handman Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 11:31 AM To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: RE: [Videolib] Question on Site license agreement - ABC News video
Jed! this is simply not helpful. Buying something from "another more reasonable company" is in most cases not an option. Effective collection building in libraries entails acquiring specific materials to meet both specific and general user needs. Those specific materials are very often distributed by specific vendors (i.e. vendors that have the exclusive rights to distribute the particular work). It's all good and well to rage against IP indignities, but for working librarians, getting on with business means dealing within the current requirements of copyright and licensing. I'm all for an idealistic going to the battlements in favor of broad IP rights for libraries; I'm in favor of pushing copyright envelopes, as well. On the other hand, if I need an ABC title, I'm damn well gonna do what it takes to score it for my clients.
At 09:21 AM 9/17/2004 -0400, you wrote:
ABC is part of Disney empire. They are historically at the front of expanding IP rights at the expense of society, consumers, future creators, current competitors, you name it. Others follow by necessity. Please resist and buy something from another more reasonable company. Jed -----Original Message-----
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Brigid Duffy Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 5:32 PM To: email@example.com Subject: Re: [Videolib] Question on Site license agreement - ABC News video
I have run into this before with ABC News. Returned a tape to them once, because of this.
Many ABC News shows are also sold by Films for the Humanities & Sciences (http://www.films.com <http://www.films.com/> ) which does NOT make purchasers sign this agreement.
Incidentally, we have had a purchase order hanging with ABC for many months because they will not ship until the order is complete. I've limited myself to calling once a month on this order; the last two times the person at ABC said they would get back to me the same day on when I could expect fulfillment. My next call is scheduled for October 5 ...
Brigid Duffy Audio Visual/ITV Center San Francisco State University San Francisco CA 94132-4200 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
On Thursday, September 16, 2004, at 11:38 AM, Karen Harrison wrote:
<?fontfamily><?param Arial><?smaller>Been lurking awhile on this list and enjoying the variety of posts. Just cataloging a new video today published by ABC News which included a full page Site license agreement indicating that the agreement expires on08/30/2006! And on or before that date we should send $25 to renew the agreement. Never seen a video license agreement like this before. Is this common? If so, do other libraries with videos keep track of these expirations and cough up the money to renew them? The other parts of the agreement look pretty standard, i.e.- can't copy the video, or charge for viewing the video, etc..<?/smaller><?/fontfamily>
<?fontfamily><?param Times New Roman><?smaller>Karen Harrison <?/smaller><?/fontfamily><?smaller>Catalog Librarian Vi Tasler Library,Bellevue,WA<?/smaller>
<?fontfamily><?param Times New Roman><?color><?param 0000,0000,FFFF><?smaller>City<?/smaller><?/color><?/fontfamily><?color><?par am 0000,0000,FFFF><?smaller>University Change your life for goodŽ
<?/smaller><?/color><?fontfamily><?param Times New Roman> <?/fontfamily>
Gary Handman Director Media Resources Center Moffitt Library UC Berkeley email@example.com http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC
"Movies are poems, a holy bible, the great mother of us." --Ted Berrigan