On 2/15/06 9:58 AM, "M. Claire Stewart" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> 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.
> 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
Proud Resident of a BLUE STATE
333 W 39th St. 503
NY NY 10018
Videolib mailing list