RE: [Videolib] Preservation/Security copies

(clarkjc@jmu.edu)
Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:11:44 -0500

Hey, everyone. I agree with deg, too. And I've said so before.

My caveat would be that exercising this option--which to me
is clearly authorized by the way the law is written in the
section that deg quotes--highlights the importance of
retaining good purchase records. While libraries can probably
trust one another to be requesting a title for copying on
responsible authority, once that copy effectively replaces a
lost/stolen orginal, the only proof you have that you "own"
it--besides its presence in an online catalog--are your
purchase records. I would even amend the catalog entry with a
local note, referencing the p.o. #, date, or other purchase
info and that a preservation copy has been substituted under
authority of Title 17 sec. 1089(c).

Michael Brewer's suggestion that the cooperating library that
loans the title for copying might just make the copy instead,
is a good practical one (leading to a distinction without a
difference, for purposes of the law). As for applying this
legal provision more broadly--to cover "at risk" (but also
out of print) titles--I wouldn't go that far. If we exercise
our prerogative under 108(c) diligently and freely, we
shouldn't have to worry about "at risk" titles in most cases.
Except of course where the user wants a lost/stolen/damaged
title "yesterday". But sorry: that's called life, so far as I
can see. ;)

Jeff

---- Original message ----
>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 08:12:21 -0700
>From: "Brewer, Michael" <brewerm@u.library.arizona.edu>
>Subject: RE: [Videolib] Preservation/Security copies
(again)
>To: "'videolib@library.berkeley.edu'"
<videolib@library.berkeley.edu>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> I will have to agree with Deg here. The law clearly
> states that one library can make a copy for another
> library, if that library had a legal copy to begin
> with, if that copy has now been damaged, degraded,
> stolen or lost. One can transfer to another format
> if that format is obsolete (what obsolete means is
> another topic all together; I am most interested in
> damaged, stolen and lost items). Though the law
> talks about making a copy for another library, I
> think lending one's copy to have that library make a
> copy seems also reasonable (same result, though
> perhaps a little more risky - releasing an already
> rare video to another library rather than just
> making them a copy and sending it to them). I would
> like to think that "physically at risk" copies are
> part of the exemption, but that is reading a bit
> into it. It talks about "deteriorating" copies, but
> not those "at risk" (which could encompass a much
> broader range of situations). UNPUBLISHED items can
> be backed up (regardless of condition) as
> preservation/security copies (even digitally), but
> those back ups cannot be circulated outside the
> library. Often people conflate unpublished and
> published and this is where some confusion creeps
> in.
>
>
>
> mb
>
>
>
> Michael Brewer
>
> Slavic Studies, German Studies & Media Arts
> Librarian
>
> University of Arizona Library A210
>
> 1510 E. University
>
> P.O. Box 210055
>
> Tucson, AZ 85721
>
> Voice: 520.307.2771
>
> Fax: 520.621.9733
>
> brewerm@u.library.arizona.edu
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Deg Farrelly [mailto:DEG.FARRELLY@asu.edu]
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 7:06 PM
> To: videolib@library.berkeley.edu
> Subject: RE: [Videolib] Preservation/Security copies
> (again)
>
>
>
> I am not one to contradict Gary Handman (da man!)
> but... the copyright law states (bold emphasis added
>
>
>
> (c) The right of reproduction under this section
> applies ... solely for the purpose of replacement of
> a copy or phonorecord that is damaged,
> deteriorating, lost, or stolen, or if the existing
> format in which the work is stored has become
> obsolete, if -
>
>
>
> If the only way to legally make a copy were to
> duplicate the material that you had in hand, there
> would be no way to make a copy of a lost or stolen
> item.
>
>
>
> As long as all the other provisions are met... I
> think making a duplicate of another institution's
> original would be fully within both the letter and
> the intent of the law.
>
>
>
> Jeff C., care to chime in?
>
>
>
> Deg farrelly
>
> ASU at the West Campus
>
> Phoenix, AZ
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> From: videolib-bounces@library.berkeley.edu
> [mailto:videolib-bounces@library.berkeley.edu] On
> Behalf Of Gary Handman
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 4:41 PM
> To: videolib@library.berkeley.edu
> Subject: Re: [Videolib] Preservation/Security copies
> (again)
>
>
>
> woah woah hold it!
>
> Section 108 DOES NOT (repeat after me) make
> provisions for borrowing a copy of a work that the
> library ONCE OWNED (but which went belly) up for the
> purposes of making a replacement. The law allows
> libraries to make copies of materials in their
> current collections which are physically at risk and
> for which no replacement is available or to transfer
> titles which are no longer playable with commonly
> available technology. The copy may be put into play
> -- the original may not.
>
> I think you'd be on way thin ice making copies of
> another institution's better condition video...
>
> Gary
>
> At 03:24 PM 1/24/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I heard from very few people about the
> preservation/security copy issue, which makes me
> wonder...
>
> I am wondering if any of you have actually used this
> exemption at any point (the exemption which allows
> libraries to get a copy of a damaged or lost item
> from another institution), or if any of you have
> made a copy of a video for another library that was
> using this exemption. If so, I would love to hear
> about it.
>
> It is hard for me to believe that no library out
> there has ever lost or damaged an out of print
> video. On the other hand, I also don't want to
> believe that no media librarian out there has ever
> had the 1) knowledge, and 2) perseverance to
> actually use this exemption in order to get a copy
> of a video from another institution.
>
> If this, indeed, is the case, that this exemption is
> not being used to provide our customers with items
> that we legally purchased, and which we have every
> right to duplicate (or request a duplicate from
> another institution), it is really too bad.
>
> I think that as a group we might want to figure out
> some sort of process (and agreement) for providing
> one another copies of videos, when all the terms
> required of this exemption are met (1. legal copy
> was once owned by the requesting institution; 2. it
> is now lost, stolen, or damaged; 3. the video is not
> available for purchase "at a reasonable price").
>
> I don't yet belong to VRT (I am fairly new to the
> Media Arts portion of my job), but perhaps that is
> the group through which to work on this. Anyone
> else have any ideas, comments, etc?
>
> mb
>
> Michael Brewer
> Slavic Studies, German Studies & Media Arts
> Librarian
> University of Arizona Library A210
> 1510 E. University
> P.O. Box 210055
> Tucson, AZ 85721
> Voice: 520.307.2771
> Fax: 520.621.9733
> brewerm@u.library.arizona.edu
>
>
> Gary Handman
> Director
> Media Resources Center
> Moffitt Library
> UC Berkeley
> ghandman@library.berkeley.edu
> http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC
>
> ****
>
> "Movies are poems, a holy bible, the great mother of
> us."
> --Ted Berrigan

===========
Jeff Clark
Director
Media Resources MSC 1701
James Madison University
Harrisonburg VA 22807
clarkjc@jmu.edu (email)
540-568-6770 (phone)
540-568-7037 (fax)
_______________________________________________
Videolib mailing list
Videolib@library.berkeley.edu
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/videolib