[Videolib] Question on Site license agreement - ABC News

Susan Albrecht (albrechs@wabash.edu)
Mon, 20 Sep 2004 09:16:03 -0500

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Well, Jed, I don't appreciate the assumption that I need a definition of
the word. I do not, thank you very much. Yes, I was talking about
INTERCHANGABILITY; no, I was not talking about PRICE CONTROL. They are not
the same issue.

And don't give me "we shoulds," please, as you have no right to tell me or
others what we should or should not do. You are "offering clarification of
the lies and myths propagated by the copyright cartel"--gee, now there's an
objective statement.

Let me go back to the beginning. HERE is my point. This list is filled
with people of all different kinds of backgrounds. Given the frequency
with which the SAME issues come up again & again AND the frequency of
misstatements about things such as fair use or PPR & charging admittance, I
think we can safely assume that the range of people's understanding here is
very broad. There are people on this list who are clearly experts. There
are folks who have worked in the field for decades. There are also folks
who are "doing media" because it got tacked onto their job descriptions and
who have no idea what's allowable or not. This doesn't mean they shouldn't
be here, but I feel for them when they want to know what's okay--RIGHT now,
with the CURRENT laws & interpretations of the laws--and they get perhaps a
half dozen messages, all in agreement, and then they get something from you
which is strident and says that we need to push the limits or challenge the
system. There *is* a place for that discussion--absolutely!--but I don't
think when a person who just wants clarification of a basic situation [can
I advertise & show this 16mm film of unknown origin in my public library?]
is the place for it.

I've had enough of this "debate." If others want to continue, fine. If
I've stepped over the bounds, Gary or others can send me a reprimand. I
love this place--it's been a tremendous help to me over the last 7 or so
years and has provided some good chuckles along the way--but this kind of
"discussion" just sets my blood boiling.

Zipping my lips now,

At 08:51 AM 9/20/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>Dear Susan,
>With all due respect, Jed, I wasn't even talking about controlling
>price. I was talking about availability of specific content. First of
>all, so was I. Main Entry: fungible Function: adjective
>Etymology: New Latin fungibilis, from Latin fungi to perform 1 : being of
>such a nature that one part or quantity may be replaced by another equal
>part or quantity in the satisfaction of an obligation <oil, wheat, and
>lumber are fungible commodities> 2 :
>Second, since you bring it up, controlling price through controlling
>availabilty sounds like a pretty good description of monopoly. We grant
>such a monopoly through copyright and when it is abused, we should take
>back the grant. Market power, legal challenge, lobbying and education
>(in this case of clients) are all valid ways to do that.
> And again, with all due respect, you ARE entitled to your opinion that
> the current system re: copyright sucks. Did I ever say that? I think
> I've said that copyright is too broad, too long, too powerful, too
> punative, too over reaching, too controlled by corporate interests with
> no investment in future creativity or the common stream of culture
> represented by libraries. But it IS the system, and since often your
> answers (based upon your personal opinion) come in response to a list
> member's question about what's appropriate or legal behavior, it is
> frustrating. People are typically looking for *clarification,* and to
> have opinions about how it should be or what we must fight for put forth
> in response often doesn't help the person deal with the here & now. The
> safe and/or simple answer is not always the best one. Just because you
> disagree with me doesn't mean I am not offering *clarification* of the
> lies and myths propagated by the corporate copyright cartel. My
> 'opinions' are based on years of study. In fact, they are not just 'my
> opinions' but shared by many librarians, legal experts, historians, media
> scholars and even some ALA staffers. I don't claim that gives them any
> more validity than if they were just 'mine' but do challenge your
> implication that because they are just 'mine' they have less validity. I
> think individual librarians are capable of balancing public and private;
> long term and short term; individual and group needs better than almost
> any other profession...if they have the information. I have no
> expectations that they will follow my suggestions without thinking. Why
> don't you trust their judgment?

Susan Albrecht
Acquisitions Coordinator
Wabash College Lilly Library
Crawfordsville, IN

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."--Neil Peart

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/pipermail/videolib/attachments/bc223ee5/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--