Here is a set of copyright guidelines that I developed for a recent copyright presentation:
“Copyright is a balance between those who hold copyright and those who use copyrighted works. Copyright’s purpose is to facilitate innovation, learning, expression of ideas, and the dissemination of knowledge.”
Here are some questions to consider when copying: (Please download a pdf version of these guidelines here.)
1. Is the work being copied protected by Copyright? Ideas, facts, and works in the public domain (often the life of the author plus fifty years) are not protected by Copyright. They may be copied and reproduced without restriction.
2. Are you copying an insubstantial portion of a work? Copyright is the sole right to reproduce a substantial portion of a work. An insubstantial portion may be copied without any permission. Exercise individual judgment when determining whether copying is substantial or insubstantial. Consider how much is being copied as well as the significance of the portion being copied to the overall work.
3. Is the work available via a Western Libraries digital license? Western Libraries negotiates digital and site licenses directly with content providers and electronic vendors. The licenses purchased grant the Western community permission to access a vast amount of licensed databases, e-journals, and e-books.
4. Is the work licensed under Creative Commons or available via open access? Works licensed under Creative Commons and works available via open access may often be copied liberally for non-commercial purposes.
5. Is the work publicly available on the Internet? Websites are protected by Copyright in the same way print items are protected by copyright. Uploading a webpage to the Internet and making it publicly available can be a form of implied permission. Websites typically give implied permission that enables visitors to link, copy and print material from the site.
6. Can you link? Yes! Hyperlinking does not constitute creating a copy. Feel free to link to other websites or to provide links to your students or library patrons. Recent Supreme Court cases, Crookes v. Newton and Warman v. Fournier, have clarified this question.
7. Fair Dealing – If a substantial portion of a copyrighted work is being copied, reproduction may fall within fair dealing. This is a user right to copy a substantial portion, when fair and reasonable to do so, without permission or reimbursement.
An analysis involving six criteria can help evaluate fairness on a case by case basis:
Purpose – Fair dealing for the purpose of research, private study, education, parody, satire, criticism, review, and news reporting does not infringe copyright. These categories must be interpreted broadly. Copying must fall within one of these categories.
If the copying does fall within one of these catagories, proceed to consider the remaining five criteria below:
A. Character – Multiple copies widely distributed might be unfair while a single copy for a specific purpose may be fair. Consider the traditional and customary copying practices at your institution. They help shape what is considered fair.
B. Amount – Consider the proportion being copied in relation to the entire work. No set amount exists which is fair. Exercise individual judgement, make a reasonable decision, and adopt the perspective of the end user. In some cases, it could be fair to copy an entire work.
C. Alternatives – Was it necessary to copy this particular work? Was it necessary to copy the amount that was copied? Copying may be fair if it can be demonstrated it was necessary to copy a particular work and a particular amount.
D. Nature – Consider the nature of the work. Copying a confidential work not intended for public release may be unfair. Copying a published piece of academic writing may be fair.
E. Effect – Does the copy have a demonstrable and harmful effect on the commercial market of the original work? If so, this might be unfair.
Adapted from:
Canadian Association of University Teachers. (2011, April). CAUT Guidelines for the Use of Copyrighted Material. Retrieved from http://www.caut.ca/uploads/Copyright_guidelines.pdf
Canadian Association of University Teachers. (2008, December). CAUT Intellectual Property Advisory: Fair Dealing. Retrieved from http://www.caut.ca/uploads/IP-Advisory3-en.pdf
Murray, L. & Trosow, S. (2007). Canadian Copyright: A Citizen’s Guide. Toronto: Between the Lines.
Trosow, S. (2012, July 14). SCC decisions provide clear guidance on fair dealing policies. Retrieved from http://samtrosow.wordpress.com/2012/07/14/scc-decisions-provide-clear-guidance-on-fair-dealing-policies/
What is fair dealing? Everything you need to know about this important copyright user right. A Copyright Youtube Tutorial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_j-rN_AVGo
Created for LIS 9713, Internet Broadcasting for the Public Sector
By Alan Kilpatrick
July 2012
Access Copyright: What does it mean for Western? A Librarian’s Guide
Thursday, July 26th, 12-1pm, North Campus Building 295:
Western was one of the first universities to sign an Access Copyright Agreement. Alan Kilpatrick, an MLIS Candidate, will present the details of this agreement and discuss how it affects libraries and librarians at Western. This is a great opportunity for students interested in academic librarianship and practising academic librarians to discuss the implications of this agreement.
Please find the powerpoint slides and accompanying handouts below. Please feel free to download a copy of the presentation for your own use or to distribute it among your colleagues:
Access Copyright What Does it Mean-Kilpatrick
Handout – Copyright Guidelines-Kilpatrick
Handout – Copyright Resources – Kilpatrick
(Originally posted March 24th, 2012)
An amendment to the recent Access Copyright licensing agreement sheds some light on the fee recalculation and rebate issued to Western students. Please find it here: Addendum to License Agreement letter (Jan 30)
We have been having a hard time understanding why the university was issuing rebate cheques in the face of such a large royalty increase. Initially, we explored the idea that the university may have raised the fee in anticipation of the forthcoming licensing agreement, then issued rebate cheques when the fee turned out to be lower than expected. However, it was never clear if this was actually the case.
This amendment explains that the royalties section, which increases the FTE fee to $27.50, shall be deleted from the licensing agreement and replaced with the text of this amendment in consideration of the universities willingness to settle with Access Copyright.
The amendment states that the royalty for the period from January 2011 to April 2011, and thru to April 30 2012, shall be calculated at the much lower rate of the previous agreement rather than $27.50. The previous licensing agreement rate was $3.38 per FTE and 10 cents per page for course packs. This seems to indicate why rebates were issued by the university.
While the licensing agreement and this amendment are publicly available from the Copyright Board, the university choose not to release them at any point. Western’s failure to make this information available to the larger university community is troubling and seems to suggest some deceptiveness on the part of the university.
Alan Kilpatrick
(Originally posted March 18th, 2012)
My recent Access Copyright objection letter was included in the March issue of Western News.
Here is the link: Librarian association objects to copyright deal.
Regards,
Alan Kilpatrick
(Originally posted March 7th, 2012)
On January 30, 2012 the University of Western Ontario and Access Copyright, Canada’s Copyright Licensing Agency, reached a licensing agreement on the reproduction of copyrighted works on campus that increases the annual fee per full time equivalent (FTE) student to $27.50.
Unjustified and burdensome, the university has passed this excessive increase onto students with no real consultation, discussion, or approval from the Western student body.
Fundamentally flawed, the licensing agreement features broad definitions of key terms and gives Access Copyright rights that do not exist under Canada’s Copyright Act. The agreement expands the definition of “copy” to include posting a link to a digital copy, a definition not set out or supported by the Copyright Act or court decisions interpreting the act.
An intrusive invasion of privacy, the agreement violates academic freedom and may have serious negative consequences for the students, faculty, and librarians of Western. The licensing agreement mandates the creation of survey instruments to monitor the volume of copyrighted works in use. With the expanded definition of “copy” and the reference to e-mail in the definition of “course collection”, the agreement could require the university to monitor students, faculty, and librarians and their e-mail accounts and course content for use of copyrighted materials.
As the rising number of colleges and universities opting out of continued arrangements with Access Copyright understand, Access Copyright licensing agreements have become increasingly unnecessary. The rights granted are limited and do not go beyond established user rights like fair dealing. As fair dealing has been strengthened, the academic community has begun to move away from traditional licensing agreements like Access Copyright.
Over thirty Canadian universities have elected to opt-out from dealing with Access Copyright and are actively exploring alternatives to the license. Modern and innovative alternatives include making better use of the fair dealing rights under existing copyright law, expanding access to direct site-licensed material through Western Libraries, and increasing use of open access materials.
Western’s decision to sign the agreement is poorly timed. Pending amendments to the Copyright Act in Parliament and decisions from the Supreme Court may clarify and expand user rights for Canadian universities.
The Progressive Librarians Guild (London Chapter) supports the move to reject Access Copyright and this agreement. Unfortunately, the University of Western Ontario’s decision to enter the agreement has significantly undermined the continuing efforts of colleges and universities across Canada to oppose the proposed tariff at the Copyright Board.
The Progressive Librarians Guild condemns the Access Copyright licensing agreement and urges the University of Western Ontario to cancel the agreement.
A copy of the licensing agreement between Access Copyright and the University of Western Ontario can be found here: AC-UWO, Addendum to License Agreement letter (Jan 30)
Alan Kilpatrick
March 7, 2012
(Originally posted February 9th, 2012)
On January 30 2012, UWO and U of T announced they had signed copyright agreements with Access Copyright, the collective responsible for reproductive rights in Canada. The move to sign this agreement is cause for concern and will have potentially serious repercussions for the post-secondary community in Canada.
Western, UofT sign agreement with Access Copyright
Below, I have summarized the notable responses, blogs, and objections that have arisen in reaction.
While several post-secondary institutions declared they would not sign the licence and would end their relationship with Access Copyright, UWO and U of T announced two weeks ago that they had signed agreements. Howard Knopff, Sam Trosow, and the Canadian Association of University Teachers explore the recent decision here:
U. of T. and Western Capitulate to Access Copyright – Howard Knopf
Toronto and Western sign licensing agreement with Access Copyright – Sam Trosow
BACKGROUNDER: UWO and U of T Agreements with Access Copyright
The text of the agreement signed by U of T can be found here.
The decision to sign the agreement was carried out without consultation of the Western student body and provoked rebuke from the Western USC here and from the Canadian Federation of Students here.
When the tariff was initially submitted to the Copyright Board of Canada in March 2010, it provoked immediate concern. It features large royalty increases, attempts to rollback user rights, and claims compensation for uses not covered by the Copyright Act. Over 100 objections were filed with the Copyright Board in August 2010 from groups including the CLA, the Canadian Federation of Students, the Canadian Association of University Teachers, and the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations. Some of these objections can be found here:
CAUT-CFS Objection to Access Copyright Tariff
CLA Objection to the Tariff
Notable bloggers including Michael Geist and Howard Knopf summarize and break down the objections to the Access Copyright tariff here:
Access Copyright’s excessive $45 per university student proposed tariff – Howard Knopf
Should Canadian Universities Walk Away From Access Copyright? – Michael Geist
Students and Teachers File Joint Objection to Proposed Access Copyright Tariff – Sam Trosow
Additionally, Professor Sam Trosow provides background and explores the problems associated with the tariff in two detailed video presentations below:
Bill C‐32 and the Access Copyright Tariff: Double Trouble for Educators and Students
Bill C-32 and the Access Copyright Tariff: Still Double Trouble for Higher Education
Alan Kilpatrick
LibraryCanuck 