Thursday, October 27, 2022

Collaborative Problem Solving! : 2022 Miami University Libraries Copyright Conference

Copyright symbol made from puzzle pieces

When the Miami University Libraries Copyright Conference ended, I set an intention to get notes up quickly on the five sessions. Clearly life intervened. I'm sorry.  Finally, here are the notes to the last session, which occurred on Sept. 16.  A recording of the session and slides are available.


Bring your copyright questions to this session! Our group of panelists will demonstrate the various ways copyright librarians often work together to think through and address copyright issues.


My Summary:

The three topics were: Copyright Claims Board, ILL, and preservation. Yes, three very different topics and all quite interesting. One thing that stood out to me - across the board - was libraries to think beyond the norm. With the CCB, that showed up in libraries taking the step of opting out even if others felt they didn't need to. With ILL - to me - it was the recognition that CONTU was created in 1979 and the world has changed a lot since then.  In terms of preservation, it was the idea (and complication) of preservation being done across country boundaries.

Many interesting details and worth a listen!


  • Crews noted the importance of each word in the session title. Collaborative. Problem. Solving. 
  • Crews started by saying that they would be providing new problems for us to solve.
  • Ana Enriquez talked about the Copyright Claims Board (CCB) and her institution's (Penn State) efforts to get the word out about it. (See slides)
    • Her presentation included an overview of the CCB and contained lots of good details,including thoughts about sovereign immunity and whether there could be a constitutional challenge to the Copyright Claims Board.
  • Cindy Kristof talked about CONTU – ILL and Resource Sharing (See slides)
    • She begin with quick comments about the Copyright Claims Board and opting out, and the complication of doing so at Kent State University Libraries.
    • She provided interesting pre-history to CONTU as well as links to presentations, etc., on alternatives to CONTU.
    • There have been no lawsuits associated with Section 108.
    • Kenny and Cindy talked about the cost of copyright fees versus the cost of a journal subscription. The specific examples given were fascinating and not something I would have considered, given that I do not do ILL.
  •  Crews talked about preservation activities within libraries.
    • Preservation activities are collaborative because they are about acquisitions, borrowing, collection development, donor agreements and licenses, etc.
      • An agreement may impact preservation, if it is restrictive.
      • An agreement can be neutral, restrictive, or generous.
      • He talked through the language in 108 and provided interesting questions. For example, what does damaged mean? What "judgment calls" must we make?
    • Can we preserve works before they are destroyed?
      • What happens is preservation means moving a work across country boundaries?
    • These are questions that the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is thinking about. Crews noted that new information from WIPO on this topic is coming.
      • Will there be a treaty or will there be guidance?
      • He encouraged folks to work through their professional organizations in order to know what is happening and to contribute to the WIPO discussion.
  • Q&A
    • Ana Enriquez reminded us of the breadth of fair use and also that the usage details matter.
      • "Fair Use-y"
      • "What if..."  "It depends"
      • What are the institution's standards?

No comments: