Either way, here is the original text which is still representative of how some people view copyright: But, again, the legacy book publishing world is really admitting they hate libraries. I have removed the images of used copies for sale at the end of this article, however. I’m leaving the overall text here to note the kind of attitude, but will note that they disclaim it (though their explanation does not make much sense, as I can’t see why a “formatter” would add text, or why its “intention” made any sense either. Update: After this post was written, but before it was published, one of the authors of this book published a post on Facebook saying that the copyright license text discussed below was a mistake and was removed in future copies. In other words, it’s most likely only used when other options aren’t readily available. In almost every case, scanned CDL books are a second-best choice compared to what else is available. The formatting is better, they’re designed to work better on ebook readers which provide additional features. If anything, what’s happened in the market for licensed ebooks to libraries actually helps to prove why we need controlled digital lending in the first place.Īs for (2) that argument is also garbage for a number of reasons, most notably that official ebooks are just generally way more useful than the scanned ebooks anyway. And that doesn’t even get into the fact that the big publishers have turned licensed ebooks for libraries into an extortionate, nonsense scheme to effectively block libraries from lending ebooks at all. It’s whether or not copyright allows certain behaviors, and here it absolutely does. The question is not must copyright enable any market. First, (1) is a preposterous argument because (yet again) you could say the exact same thing for regular, existing libraries. There are simple answers to both of these. To counter this, publishers (and their supporters, which unfortunately include some authors) argue that (1) this interferes with the market for licensed ebooks, and (2) that there is a real difference in lending out the digital scans: that they don’t deteriorate the way that physical books do. So, literally each separate component of what is happening with Controlled Digital Lending has already been deemed to be legal and exactly what we expect libraries to do. ![]() On top of that, courts have determined, multiple times, that book scanning itself is fair use for libraries. Similarly libraries are given explicit rights to make copies, so long as those collections are made available to the public. Copyright law already has first sale rights, written directly into the law and allow for the lending or reselling of copyright-covered works without a license or permission. With CDL it’s a scan of that book, but the scan is tied to the physical copy, so that if a digital copy is loaned out, no one else can take out another copy.Įvery part of that has been deemed legal. ![]() With a physical library it’s literally that physical copy. In both cases, it gets a physical copy of the book (either through purchase or donation), and then proceeds to lend out that copy. Controlled digital lending is no different from how a library lends out books today. The attack on controlled digital lending (CDL) more or less proves this.Īs much as publishers like to claim they “love libraries,” their actions here speak quite clearly that they would destroy them if they could. In some ways they’re a legacy holdover from before publishers had that much power. We’ll get to some of the details in a moment, but we’ve joked in the past that if libraries were new today there’s no way that book publishers would let them exist. That, of course, is not how the publishers describe the lawsuit, but it’s absolutely what the lawsuit is about. OL15947003W Page_number_confidence 88.33 Pages 182 Ppi 300 Republisher_date 20200228165615 Republisher_operator Republisher_time 306 Scandate 20200221115326 Scanner Scanningcenter cebu Scribe3_search_catalog isbn Scribe3_search_id 9780838985892 Tts_version 3.Wed, Mar 22nd 2023 09:27am - Mike MasnickĮarlier this week there was finally a hearing in the case brought by the big book publishers to kill off libraries. Access-restricted-item true Addeddate 11:01:45 Boxid IA1778723 Camera Sony Alpha-A6300 (Control) Col_number COL-609 Collection_set printdisabled External-identifier
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |