Textbook pricing and copyright

An article from Inside Higher Ed, Challenge on Textbook Pricing, November 22, 2010 highlights the markets assault on the high cost of textbooks. And the earlier July 8, 2010 filing of an amici curia brief in the mentioned case, Costco Wholesale Corporation v. Omega, by the Library Copyright Alliance highlights the activity needed by library associations to continue to be able to provide the services that are traditional in the U.S.

Copyright Symposium for Faculty

How does copyright impact our research and teaching?

September 10, 2010 (Friday)
9 a.m. – 3 p.m. (lunch included)

Auraria Library Enhanced Learning Center

Speaker: Kevin Smith, J.D., Scholarly Communications Officer, Perkins Library, Duke University

Register for this lively symposium on copyright issues online or call 303-556-3526

Topics include:

• Applications in teaching
• Protecting your content
• Copyright and media
• Evolving landscape of copyright

Presented by:
Auraria Library
Teaching/Learning Center CCD
Center for Faculty Development UCD
Center for Faculty Development MSCD
Teaching with Primary Sources – Colorado
Health Sciences Library
CU Online

Video clips, teaching and rules changes issued Monday, 8/2/10, by the U.S. Copyright Office

Video clips, teaching and rule changes issued Monday, 8/2/10, by the U.S. Copyright Office

"Champions of fair use say new copyright exemption is a victory for teaching and learning."
Inside Higher Ed

"Copyright Ruling + Online Video Platforms = Active Learning"
Inside Higher Ed

"Information on the New DMCA Exemptions"
Chronicle of Higher Education

Google Books Settlement amended

The following resources are from the Center for Intellectual Property's Digital Copyright Listerv; subscriptions available at http://www.umuc.edu/distance/odell/cip/listserv.shtml#digital.


On Friday, November 13, 2009, the parties to the Google Books Settlement filed an amended agreement with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Following are a variety of resources about the latest developments on the topic: Press Coverage; Legal; Overviews.


PRESS COVERAGE

-----
Google relents with revised digital books settlement.
Washington Post, November 15, 2009.

"In a move to allay its critics and the Justice Department, Google filed in federal court a revised legal settlement that would allow it to distribute millions of digital books online."

-----
Google backtracks on putting world's books online.
Sunday Times Online, November 15, 2009.

"Google has slashed in half its controversial plans to become the world's biggest online library in a legal move to appease critics, including China, the US Justice Department, authors and publishers."

-----
Google makes concessions on digital book deal.
Associated Press, November 14, 2009.

"Internet search leader Google will ease its control over millions of copyright-protected books earmarked for its digital library if a court approves a revised lawsuit settlement that addresses objections of antitrust regulators."

-----
Google, Authors try to answer book deal concerns.
Reuters, November 14, 2009.

"Google and the Authors Guild filed a new version of a deal to create a massive online library on Friday in hopes of answering antitrust and copyright concerns in the United States and overseas."

-----
Google narrows scope of book-scanning project.
Telegraph, November 14, 2009.

"Google and a group of publishers and authors have agreed to scale back the scope of their proposed digital books library, which could resolve a legal dispute and clear the way for millions of books to be sold online."

----
Google submits revised digital book settlement.
Agence France Press, November 14, 2009.

"Google and US authors and publishers submitted a revised settlement to a US judge Friday seeking approval of an agreement that would clear the way for millions of books to be sold online."

-----
Terms of Digital Book Deal With Google Revised.
New York Times, November 13, 2009.

"Google and groups representing book publishers and authors filed a modified version of their controversial books settlement with a federal court on Friday. The changes would pave the way for other companies to license Google's vast digital collection of copyrighted out-of-print books, and might resolve its conflicts with European governments."

-----
Revised Google Settlement Offers Minor Changes on Antitrust Issue, No Response on Library Pricing.
Library Journal, November 14, 2009.

"Shortly before midnight last night, Google, the Authors Guild, and the Association of American Publishers released a revised version of the Google Book Search Settlement, with some clear concessions to foreign rightsholders (as noted by Publishers Weekly), a vague-and, to critics, fatally inadequate-concession on orphan works. There was also no response to library concerns about pricing of the potentially monopolistic institutional database-an issue that Google representatives say can't be addressed in the settlement."

-----
Google Books settlement sets geographic, business limits.
CNET News, November 13, 2009.

"A revised settlement filed late Friday over Google's right to scan digital books places additional limits on the company. The settlement allows out-of-print books from only English-speaking countries to be scanned, restricts the ways that Google can make money from scanning and digitizing out-of-print books, and requires a registry to seek out copyright holders who do not come forward."

-----
Google Settlement Filed.
Publishers Weekly, November 13, 2009.

"After two delays, attorneys for the AAP, Authors Guild and Google filed an amended settlement agreement late Friday night with Judge Denny Chin in an effort to end litigation brought by the publishers and authors against Google over its library scanning program. As expected by many, the biggest change in the agreement deals with international works. The agreement is now limited to books that were either registered with the U.S. Copyright Office or published in the U.K., Australia or Canada. The parties said that after feedback from foreign rightsholders they decided to narrow the class to include only countries "which share a common legal heritage and similar book industry practices" with the U.S."

-----
Blog: Google, Content Groups Sign New Google Books Deal.
PC Magazine, November 13, 2009.

"Google and a number of agencies representing book publishers agreed to a revised settlement covering Google Books on Friday, limiting the international scope of the agreement and providing a sort of trust fund for "orphaned" works."

-----
Google, Authors Limit Reach of Online Book Settlement.
Bloomberg, November 14, 2009.

"Google Inc. and groups of authors and publishers agreed to scale back the international reach of a settlement designed to create a digital book library."

----
Google, Plaintiffs Submit Revised Book Search Settlement.
PC World, November 14, 2009.

"Right up against a deadline to submit a revised settlement agreement to a judge overseeing a lawsuit filed against Google by the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers, the parties filed their second take near midnight on Friday."


LEGAL:

-----
Blog: Google Book Search Settlement Revised: No Reader Privacy Added.
Posted by Cindy Cohn on DeepLinks (Electronic Frontier Foundation), November 14, 2009.

"Late Friday night the parties to the Google Book Search class action submitted a revised settlement agreement to the federal court in New York that is hearing the case. Unfortunately, the parties did not add any reader privacy protections. The only nominal change was that they formally confirmed a position they had long taken privately that information will not be freely shared between Google and the Registry."

-----
Blog: Amended Google Book Settlement: Doesn't Deal with Privacy Problems.
ACLU of Northern California, November 14, 2009.

"The Amended Google Book Search Settlement, filed with the Court on Friday, November 13, does not resolve the privacy concerns. The ACLU, along with EFF and the Samuelson Clinic, have been working to ensure that Google Book Search does not become a one-stop shop for government surveillance into the reading habits of millions of Americans and pushing for robust privacy and free speech safeguards to be included in the Settlement provisions."

-----
Blog: Is the Google Books Settlement Worth the Wait?
Open Book Alliance, November 13, 2009.

"Today, Google, the Authors Guild, and the Association of American Publishers released their revised book settlement proposal in an attempt to fix the deeply flawed legal agreement. Open Book Alliance co-chair Peter Brantley said, 'Our initial review of the new proposal tells us that Google and its partners are performing a sleight of hand; fundamentally, this settlement remains a set-piece designed to serve the private commercial interests of Google and its partners. None of the proposed changes appear to address the fundamental flaws illuminated by the Department of Justice and other critics that impact public interest.
By performing surgical nip and tuck, Google, the AAP, and the AG are attempting to distract people from their continued efforts to establish a monopoly over digital content access and distribution; usurp Congress's role in setting copyright policy; lock writers into their unsought registry, stripping them of their individual contract rights; put library budgets and patron privacy at risk; and establish a dangerous precedent by abusing the class action process.'"

(Members of the OBA include: Amazon; American Society of Journalists and Authors; Council of Literary Magazines and Presses; Internet Archive; Microsoft; National Writers Union; New York Library Association; Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America; Small Press Distribution; Special Libraries Association; and Yahoo)

-----
Blog: Revised Google Book Settlement Filed & Live Blogging The Press Call.
Posted by Danny Sullivan on Search Engine Land, November 14, 2009.

"As expected, a revised Google Book Settlement has been filed today - about as late as possible. The agreement narrows the scope to the US, UK, Canada and Australia. It alters how revenue generated by "unclaimed works" will be handled. It formally grants retailers who license out-of-print books covered by the settlement - including Google competitors - a 37% share of sales. It also clarifies how the book pricing algorithm will work."

-----
Blog: GBS: Midnight Madness.
Posted by James Grimmelmann on the Laboratorium, November 14, 2009.

"The amended settlement dropped in the eleventh hour. Here's a redline version and here's the related memorandum with the procedural details.
The best news coverage is the New York Times story; the best blog coverage is Danny Sullivan's. I've just completed a first pass through the amended settlement, tweeting all the way."


OVERVIEWS:

-----
Overview of the Revised Google Books Settlement Agreement. Association of American Publishers (AAP).

-----
FAQ Revised Google Books Settlement Agreement. Association of American Publishers (AAP).

-----
Amended Settlement Filed in Authors Guild v. Google. Authors Guild.

-----
Modifications to the Google Books Settlement.
Google Public Policy Blog, November 13, 2009.

"Last year, we joined with a broad class of authors and publishers to announce a settlement agreement that would make millions of out-of-print books available to students and readers in every part of the U.S., while forging new opportunities for rightsholders to sell access to their books. Tonight we submitted an amended version of the Google Books settlement agreement to the court."

Defining noncommercial use study

The report and raw data from a year long study, Defining Noncommercial, on how people view noncommercial use was released Monday, September 14, 2009 by Creative Commons. The study was conducted by Netpop Research.

An excerpt from the press release.

Creative Commons noncommercial licenses preclude use of a work “in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.” The majority of respondents (87% of creators, 85% of users) replied that the definition was “essentially the same as” (43% of creators, 42% of users) or “different from but still compatible with” (44% of creators, 43% of users) theirs. Only 7% of creators and 11% of users replied that the term was “different from and incompatible with” their definition.

Study noted by the 'In the News' email newsletter on digital copyright from the Center For Intellectual Property at the University of Maryland University College.



Study was discussed in Plagiarism Today blog from Johnathan Bailey.

Speak Now, or Forever Hold Your Copyrights!

Speak Now, or Forever Hold Your Copyrights! is an article by Steve Kolowich on the next deadline of the Google book settlement from Inside Higher Ed, September 4, 2009.

[Judge Denny] Chin, the federal judge who is presiding over Author’s Guild et al. v. Google, Inc., has been inundated with letters and amicus briefs in advance of the September 7 deadline for participants in the class action to opt out of a settlement over the company's controversial Google Books project that has received preliminary approval from the court. A handful of the documents have come from professors, university libraries, and advocacy groups.

Auraria Library students and faculty search Lexis Nexis Federal and State case law or Lexis Nexis Law reviews using these links.

Scholarly Communication Program Speaker Series Videos

Scholarly Communication Program Speaker Series Videos Now Available Online

Columbia University Libraries Scholarly Communication Program, Research without borders, held a speaker series on scholarly communication issues in 2008-09 and recently released all the videos from those events. See http://tinyurl.com/c4jrdc

First Close Look at Colleges' Digital Pirates

The First Close Look at Colleges' Digital Pirates by BROCK READ, Chronicle of Higher Education, 7 September 2007 http://chronicle.com/weekly/v54/i02/02a00102.htm (Aurarians use this link to find the password you'll need)

"Ms. Elzy and Mr. Arbogast wanted financial support from the industry, and they got it. The Digital Citizen Project, as Illinois State calls it, has benefited from considerable entertainment-industry financing, including an influx of several hundred thousand dollars that came shortly after the meeting. . Later, Illinois State secured promises that the information the university collects will not be used to prosecute students."

SPARC letter to members on the PRISM anti-open access effort

Press Release: SPARC letter to members on the PRISM anti-open access effort
Date: September 6, 2007
To: SPARC Members
From: Heather Joseph, SPARC Executive Director
Re: PRISM anti-open access effort
http://www.arl.org/sparc/advocacy/07-0907prism.html

"I'm writing to bring to your attention the recent launch of an anti-open access lobbying effort. The initiative, called "PRISM - the Partnership for Research Integrity in Science and Medicine" ( http://www.prismcoalition.org), was launched with development support from the Association of American Publishers and specifically targets efforts to expand public access to federally funded research results - including the National Institute of Health's Public Access Policy."

CERN Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication will be broadcast on the web

The main proceedings of the CERN Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication (OAI5) will be broadcast on the web as video file attachments in the programme:

http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&confId=5710

A file for each session in the main auditorium should appear approximately 10 minutes after the end of the presentation. The first such session takes place on Wednesday afternoon in Geneva, CH, and then on Thursday during most of the day and Friday morning.

We hope that many of you will join us virtually to watch. Messages to participants can be sent to oaiworkshop-organisation@cern.ch.

Support for open access publishing, a suggestion from BioMed Central

Some ideas from BioMed Central. Auraria Library is a member of BioMed Central and thus supports Auraria faculty publishing.

BioMed Central, which publishes over 170 peer-reviewed journals in biology, medicine and chemistry, has been a pioneer of the open access publishing model for academic research. Under the open access model, published articles are made universally available online with the cost being covered not by subscriptions but by article processing charges, payable on publication. Open access publishing has proven very popular with authors, and has grown dramatically since BioMed Central's launch in 2000. In order for that growth to continue, however, it is vital that sufficient funds are available to cover the cost of open access publication in a sustainable way.

There has been much discussion within the academic community about how best to pay the costs of open access publication, given that library budgets are already stretched. The Wellcome Trust examined this issue, and concluded that open access publication costs are best seen as part of the cost of doing research. Research institutions and funders recognize that research involves not only direct costs, but also indirect costs (for necessary infrastructure such as buildings/ laboratories/ maintenance/ library services etc.). We feel that it is very important that open access publishing costs should be recognized as such an infrastructure cost and budgeted for appropriately.

We would like to encourage all research institutions around the world to define an open access publishing budget for their institution, just as they currently have a library budget. A central 'open access publishing fund' could receive contributions from each of the funding organization that supports research at the institution. For example the National Institutes of Health and California Institute for Regulative Medicine both have open access policies, which enable researchers to apply for publication costs funding. For further information on all the funding agencies who have policies, please visit our website.

Having such a central fund for authors at your institution would reduce the barriers for those authors wishing to publish in an open access journal, and would thus deliver a more level playing field for open access journals to compete with traditional journals, which already receive extensive institutional support through library subscriptions.

If you would like help or ideas on how to set up a central fund or would like to discuss this further, please contact us at: institutions@biomedcentral.com.

We shall also be holding an open access consultation at the forthcoming Medical Library Association conference, on Monday, May 21st, 2007 from 7.00 - 9.00am, where we shall be discussing the issues of payment for open access publications, please do let us know if you would like to attend the event.