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.

Comments

Fair Use

[style7711]

As long as it's a 1 to 1 physical to digital copy this sounds like fair use to me.

Re:Fair Use

[perpenso]

Once it's digital, there is no 1:1 ratio. A simple Ctrl+C + Ctrl+V and suddenly it's a 2:1 ratio.

The GP's point stands. That first digital copy does seem like fair use and a hypothetical second copy does not change this.

Besides, note in the summary "can only be accessed on dedicated terminals in the library itself". The app dedicated to accessing the database and displaying the book can simply not implement copy/paste. You won't be connecting your laptop to the library network and accessing the database.

That said, its likely the digitized text will get out somehow.

Re:Fair Use

[unrtst]

I agree that sharing a copy of a book in a library is fair use. But simultaneous sharing among multiple readers is not fair use. A library can stock multiple copies of a popular book and share them among thousands of users. But one reader per copy at a time. Otherwise your 'good trade off for society as a whole' becomes out and out appropriation. I agree that libraries would be great places if every book you wanted were always 'in the stacks', but you're not talking about a small loss of revenue any more.

We're all damned lucky that the concept of libraries was established WAY before copyright (~1200BCE). I highly doubt the idea would be tolerated with so many people viewing copyright as something so sacred as you make it out to be. What does fair use have to do with this anyway? This is a pretty nice read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

I believe libraries should be able to carry any and all digital copies of books and provide them in unlimited fashion to those at the library. I do not believe that would affect revenue in any noticable way. I'm quite confident an opinion poll asking how many people would go to the library and read books on a physical work station screen if all digital books were there... that would turn out to show very little additional participation relative to book sales volumes, but a not insignificant increase to library visits (they're already pretty low).

Directly relating paper books one-to-one with a digital copy is silly - it's simply not the same thing. At the same time, I'm drawing a very arbitrary line in saying people should have to go to the library. Perhaps they should be allowed to let people take home digital copies using the one-to-one physical copy restriction or a separate digital copy license? I'm not sure where the line should be past the library, but I don't see any reason to restrict it within the library.

"they will need to pay the publisher"

[kthreadd]

Nope, they will need their permission. That doesn't necessary include financial compensation.

Re:Well now.

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed. And while I do look forward to a new reneassaince(sp?) for libraries in the light you described, it still highlights the obvious stupidity of the legal ruling. I.e. the court (from the /. summary) appears to be saying-

"It is legal for any citizen to view any library owned artistic work, if they burn the gasoline or other energy needed to physically relocate their body to the library".

*BUT*

"It is not legal for any citizen to view any library owned artistic work, if they do not physically relocate themselves via the use of gasoline or other energy, and instead use modern information technology like 'the internet' to accomplish the same thing virtually."

Yeah for logic in the modern legal age!!! ... sarcasm

Re:ok

[bobbied]

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.

They need to allow the creation of satellite locations by their members and then connect all these locations (the member's computer) via VPNs... That way, I can just have my own living room become part of the library and read anything in the collection. Sounds like a win/win to me..

Re:Well now.

[Luckyo]

This isn't US. It's normal and expected to travel by foot, bike or public transit much of which is electric in Europe. Where I live, closest library is about 1km away, and it would take me significantly longer to get there by car than by foot.
It would similarly take me much longer to reach central library of my city by car than by public transit, which has a stop about 500m from my home and a stop in front of the said central library.

This has nothing to do with "burning gasoline", and this particular strawman collapses even when used on its own merits. And it's very obvious that this isn't what the court's decision was about in the first place.