Re: [Videolib] RE: Insight Media's policy on digitization and

M. Claire Stewart (claire-stewart@northwestern.edu)
Wed, 15 Feb 2006 08:58:05 -0600

I like Gary's earlier idea/musing about a possible collaborative
project. It could be JSTOR for video: a joint project to centrally
house stream video to multiple campuses.

I also wanted to respond to Jessica's earlier comment about fair use.
It's not accurate to say that fair use doesn't apply to feature
films. There are no classes of works that are exempted in the law,
nor have courts generally excluded them. You may be thinking of some
sections of 108. You might also be referring to TEACH, but even
TEACH could be construed to cover such: "the performance of a
nondramatic literary or musical work OR reasonable and limited
portions of any other work, OR display of a work in an amount
comparable to that which is typically displayed in the course of a
live classroom session" (emphasis added).

I am also puzzled by something Chip said earlier about public
performance rights, and I'm not clear if the comment was specific to
CTC or making a general case when PPR is purchased. If libraries
purchase titles and also purchase PPR to cover any showings that
might occur outside of a class setting, they are not necessarily
obligated to purchase a digitization/streaming license in support of
classroom streaming, as long as the use can be defended under TEACH
or fair use. If the entire purchase is governed by a license,
different story.

And an earlier comment by Jonathan: I don't think anyone, including
me, is suggesting that we will not continue to purchase video titles.
I don't know where that riff about piracy came from, but no way am I
suggesting that local digitization and streaming will replace
legitimate purchase. I'm just questioning whether we have to buy and
keep on paying to do it.

I agree that we might be talking about multiple tiers, but I rather
hope the model for digital subscription is slow to develop. Ejournals
have been both a blessing and a curse (budgets and long-term
archiving, as has been pointed out) and I don't think we should be in
a rush to start renting rather than owning our collections.

Claire

At 4:17 PM -0500 2/14/06, Jerry Notaro wrote:
>Here's what I'm concerned about (well, one thing among many many
>many things)...
>
>One of my favorite classical allusions (pardon me if I've already
>flung this one out...) is the story of Procustes...nasty thuggy guy
>who invited travellers into his home, let them sleep on a tiny
>little bed...in middle of nite, cut off their heads and feet to
>match the size of the bed...
>
>What's this have to do with streamed media? Wellllllll....
>
>You got a large content universe that is used in diverse ways by a
>diverse clientele. You got a teeeeeny little part of that universe
>that is available in a gee-whiz form of delivery (an expensive form
>of delivery, at that). I have a strong feeling that there's gonna
>be a lot of head-and-feet lopping off going on...all (and only) the
>media that's fit to stream.
>
>The fact of the matter is (with profound apologize to my many
>colleagues and friends on the distribution side...you know I love
>you!): when I look at the range of titles in my collection that are
>typically screened in class or assigned for viewing outside of class
>over the course of a semester, very few (and I mean VERY few) are
>titles from distributors that offer digital rights (or are likely to
>offer such rights in the near future). If use or projected use of
>titles is the key benchmark in determining which rights to buy,
>we've got problems, Huston...
>
>I'm not willing (and probably wouldn't be able) to go down the
>Procustes road...trying to cut classroom and research need to fit
>the size of the digital bed. Scoring rights and going thru the
>effort to digitize materials in vague anticipation of need or use
>just ain't gonna cut it, either...
>
>Anyone else?
>
>I'll bite. Let me give an historical analogy which directly involved
>media. Many of you remember when media did not circulate, were not
>cataloged, and were not classified. Schools were among the first to
>tackle treating media the same as books, though we didn't have the
>help to do all that processing. Many school media specialists only
>ordered those titles that came classified and with catalog cards.
>Some, like Demco, even put them in boxes and would deliver them
>fully processed. Those titles soon became the best selling, not
>necessarily because they were the best for the situation, but
>because of how they were delivered. Granted, not an exact analogy,
>but historically accurate.
>
>Jerry, loving this discussion

-- 
____________________________________________________
M. Claire Stewart
Head, Digital Media Services, Marjorie I. Mitchell Multimedia Center
Coordinator of Digitization Projects, Northwestern University Library
(847) 467-1437
claire-stewart@northwestern.edu
http://www.library.northwestern.edu/cstewart/
http://copyrightreadings.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Videolib mailing list
Videolib@library.berkeley.edu
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/videolib