Slashdot Mirror
Top EU Court: Libraries Can Digitize Books Without Publishers' Permission
jfruh writes The top European court has ruled that libraries have the right to digitize the contents of the books in their collections, even if the copyright holders on those books don't want them to. There's a catch, though: those digitized versions can only be accessed on dedicated terminals in the library itself. If library patrons want to print the book out or download it to a thumb drive, they will need to pay the publisher.
Time to create a library that sells coffee and snacks.
- Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
As long as it's a 1 to 1 physical to digital copy this sounds like fair use to me.
Nope, they will need their permission. That doesn't necessary include financial compensation.
then the next big thing for European libraries is to allow vpning into the library network and remote viewing the kiosks through a webpage. Sounds fair to me.
If it's to be fair, though, there needs to be a link to the inventory system, disabling digital access to any book where all the copies are checked out. Wouldn't be an issue for reference books, though.
Ok, so an EU library can scan works for access on their own 'terminals' for research. Can they also make those works searchable in a similar way to that which Google does? And if so can they allow access to that index (like their book index) over the internet?
If they can then at least in the EU Google has a copyright exception if it partners with at least one EU library organisation, to their Google Books project.
I'm still struggling to understand how digitizing a library and then creating these kinds of restrictions around the use of the content somehow makes it easier to use said library.
Today, I can walk into a building called a library, and check out a book for several weeks, and not have to pay or communicate with a single person outside of that facility in order to do so.
Compare and contrast that with a "new and improved" digitized library saddled with legal loopholes and requests as you simply attempt to leave the building with information in the same manner as before.
Yup, seems legit. In a MAFIAA kind of way.
The only way to access it would be via wireless, and it would have proprietary software that can use an open internet connection to go to the libraries specific website and search/download/erase books.
This prevents people from copying or 'stealing' (quotes there for a reason people) information, but would allow the same functionality that a normal lending library allows. The books could have automatic erasure programmed into the library-reader, after 2 weeks
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
CopyrIght Sanity
Library
Cafe room
Profit!!!
Have the libraries set up small cofee/tea room sections where users can buy stuff and read the books on book readers/pads
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Personally i think if they used proper DRM to ensure they didn't have 'too many' copies of a book out at a time this would be the best solution, and the one most true to the library model. Allowing this at dedicated terminals is a start, but I would really like to see a model that allows them to work as library should work, but without the need to to bring the physical book home.
For every physical copy owned by the library it can choose to lend such materials in any way it sees fit.
Then all books can be loaned online, up to the amount owned by the library. Patrons can then read the physical copy in the library but not take them off premises (since reading the book at the library does not constitute lending the materials).
Define 'in'.
In short: good news.
Even if it doesn't have some sort of clear analog for home users, and even if it doesn't line up with the rest of copyright laws, a good public library is the cornerstone of a civilized world.
Pass a few laws that make for good libraries. I'll vote with 'ya.
You can't check out a book from the Library of Congress. There are plenty of other 'non-circulating' books at most public libraries (eg, they won't let you take home volumes from an encyclopedia, textbooks when a teacher has asked that they be put 'on reserve').
What this does is allow libraries & archives to do a few things:
That being said, there are some drawbacks -- if the physical books are being placed into deep storage, they're not getting inspected, so should something go wrong (eg, mold start to develop), it may progress further before someone notices.
I'd actually be interested in seeing the full text of the decision, to see if there are limits as to how many digital copies can be viewed at once -- if a teacher puts a book 'on reserve', and the library scans it ... can 4 students view it simultaneously if the library only owns 3 copies?
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
Physical good decay over time.
In principal, once something is digitized and stored on archival media in an un-encumbered (patent/etc.-free) published format, it will be available forever, without further degradation. Once the copyrights do expire (and except for rare exceptions like Peter Pan, the will), the digitized copies can be made available to the public.
Having digital copies also means you can have a second digital copy that is stored "offline and stored hundreds of km away," which is important if the item if the library burns down or if the city the library is in becomes a war zone and not only the library but other "local" locations that house the "offsite backups" are destroyed.
The deterioration due to time isn't going to be critical for most texts, but for photographs, paintings, and other material that may have been published on non-archival material, getting it scanned now sure beats waiting for the copyright to expire before scanning.
On this 9/11 anniversary, we have to remind ourselves of the loss that can happen when "the only copies" are destroyed: The photo archive of the construction of the World Trade Center was housed at the World Trade Center. There was no offsite backup. When the buildings were destroyed, so was this photo-archive.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Physical good decay over time.
Physical goods, like the neurons in my brain, decay over time. Sorry about that folks.
There are probably other obvious clerical errors, but I trust you guys can figure out what I meant to say.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
It's a start. Lot of "owners" think they have such far reaching power over works of art, think they get to dictate what others may and may not do.
I've heard many a museum claim that copyright gives them the authority to forbid photos. It's one thing to forbid flash photography on the grounds that flashes put out UV radiation which can damage art. But they try to forbid photos, not just flashes. Claim that it would violate copyright, even though the work of art in question is long out of copyright, and they never held ownership of any copyright over the work anyway. The Alamo also claims it's "disrespectful" to the dead. A building near downtown Dallas, the Infomart, has signs that say you can't take photos of the building, and they include in that photos of the exterior from public locations such as nearby sidewalks. They claim it's for security reasons. Some museums reveal their real fears, crying that they will not have any more visitors, not be able to sell postcards. Was funny to hear this one old lady complain about the Internet ruining their business.
One place I know of that did have a change of heart is the memorial to the Oklahoma City bombing. They still have signs up that forbid photos inside, but if you ask them, they will tell you that you can take pictures.
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
Lots of pirates are too lazy to scan their own books, but how long until every book a library has scanned ends up on the internet? And the more so because people in other countries have more trouble getting to a EU library so this will be the only way they can access the scanned books. And I'm sorry but scanned, searchable, non-DRMed books accessible to everyone are more valuable than the status quo, so once again pirates produce the higher quality goods at a cheaper price and greater convenience. It's long overdue to update our IP laws to the modern world.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Then what does the "acro" in "acrord32" stand for?
"In" means at an "dedicated electronic reading point" in a publicly accessable library.
Why does that name sound so derpy?
Once the copyrights do expire (and except for rare exceptions like Peter Pan, the will)
How are you sure that the US Congress and EU Parliament won't copy Mexico's life plus 100 copyright term once copyright in early Pooh and Mickey works is due to expire?
doesn't necessarily meet the US standards for personal owner fair use, where I can have as many damn copies in as many damn formats as I like... as long as I only use one at a time, and never get rid of the original source, which is considered the licensed version.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Natural extension of Legal Deposit which has existed in English law since 1662.
It ensure that the UKâ(TM)s published materials are systematically collected and preserved for future generations.
Most authors are trying to bring you around to their point of view. Reading is hard work... I can provide that service for a fee!