RE: Orphan works: due diligence prior to copying

["Croft, Janet B." <jbcroft@xxxxxx>]

I'm editing the wiki right now to include some of this (but I don't know when
we'll have the wiki populated enough to go live--sorry!).  I like the Google
statement very much.  The Canadian site on unlocatable copyright owners says
they issued 217 licenses and denied 7--
http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/unlocatable/licences-e.html -- but then how many
people were intimidated by the amount of work required and didn't even try? On
the other hand, the denials were actually all dismissals because the works
were already in the public domain or the proposed use was fair use. (I
appreciate their openness in providing all the dismissals and licenses granted
on their website.)

Janet Brennan Croft
Associate Professor
Head of Access Services
University of Oklahoma Libraries
Bizzell 104NW
Norman OK 73019
405-325-1918
Fax 405-325-7618
jbcroft@xxxxxx
http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/C/Janet.B.Croft-1/
http://libraries.ou.edu/
Editor of Mythlore http://www.mythsoc.org/mythlore.html
Editor of Oklahoma Librarian
http://www.oklibs.org/oklibrarian/current/index.html
"Humans need fantasy to be human. To be the place where the rising ape meets
the falling angel." -Terry Pratchett


-----Original Message-----
From: Harper, Georgia K [mailto:gharper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 3:32 PM
To: Croft, Janet B.; M. Claire Stewart; digital-copyright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Orphan works: due diligence prior to copying

Janet, the wiki sounds like a very good idea. Thanks for mentioning it.

On the other hand, I saw the Canadian information and shied away from
mentioning it because, as I understand it, the bar has been placed so
high in the Canadian model that literally *no* orphan works licenses
have ever been issued. In other words, their definition of what you need
to do is pretty much the opposite of reasonable. That said, I'm probably
wrong about the *no* licenses issued (I'm horrible about details), but
in any event, I am certain that it's not a model we want to follow. I
remember its being explicitly rejected by those who participated in the
LOC roundtables on the subject.

On the other hand, as to *mechanics,* the advice you quote below from
the Canadian information site that refers to sources of information is
good. It is just the admonition to leave no stone unturned that goes too
far, and did you see the list of documentation that the Canadian process
required? For each and every work?

On the opposite end of the continuum, see the comments of Google reps to
the LOC call for comments on its proposal (from 2006)(
http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/comments/reply/OWR0134-Google.pdf).
They, of course, advocate automated reasonable search criteria and think
in terms of high-volume clearing and identifying status. UMich was among
those who also advocated an approach to reasonableness that would
accommodate high-volume (automated) operations.

g

Georgia Harper
Scholarly Communications Advisor
University of Texas at Austin Libraries
512.495.4653; 512.971.4325 (c)

-----Original Message-----
From: Croft, Janet B. [mailto:jbcroft@xxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 3:19 PM
To: Harper, Georgia K; M. Claire Stewart;
digital-copyright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Orphan works: due diligence prior to copying

And to plug the ALA Copyright Advisory Network a bit, we're working on a
wiki, which would be a great place to put a summary of this discussion
with links to resources.  I already have a paragraph started on the
current state of orphan works legislation in the US, and it would be
great to fill it out with some best practices.  In the meantime, Canada
has had a process in place for some time.  Here is some information:
http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/unlocatable/brochure-e.html. Adapting their
criteria may be a good way to start. Excerpt:

Have you done everything you can to find the copyright owner?

The Board will grant a licence only if you have made every reasonable
effort to find the copyright owner. You must therefore conduct a
thorough search. There are many ways you can locate a copyright owner.
Try as many as you can before applying to the Board.

Even if you do not know the name or address of the copyright owner, your
search may be easier than you think. Start by contacting the copyright
collective societies that deal with uses you are interested in. One of
them may represent the copyright owner and be able to provide you with
the owner's name and address or tell you whether the owner is dead or
living abroad. Other options include using the Internet, contacting
publishing houses, libraries, universities, museums and provincial
departments of Education. If the author is no longer alive, try to find
out who inherited the copyright or who administered the estate.

The Board can provide you with a list of copyright collective societies
and their respective mandate and other sources of information. The list
of copyright collective societies can also be found on the Board's Web
site at www.cb-cda.gc.ca/societies/index-e.html.


Janet Brennan Croft
Associate Professor
Head of Access Services
University of Oklahoma Libraries
Bizzell 104NW
Norman OK 73019
405-325-1918
Fax 405-325-7618
jbcroft@xxxxxx
http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/C/Janet.B.Croft-1/
http://libraries.ou.edu/
Editor of Mythlore http://www.mythsoc.org/mythlore.html
Editor of Oklahoma Librarian
http://www.oklibs.org/oklibrarian/current/index.html
"Humans need fantasy to be human. To be the place where the rising ape
meets the falling angel." -Terry Pratchett


-----Original Message-----
From: Harper, Georgia K [mailto:gharper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 2:59 PM
To: M. Claire Stewart; digital-copyright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Orphan works: due diligence prior to copying

Claire, this is precisely what all of us should be working to create and
publish to the Web -- our own estimates of what we think, for different
kinds of works, constitutes a reasonable search. Librarians are in an
excellent position to know what resources are out there and what
resources are reasonably effective, which are a waste of time, etc.

What we *really* need is a collection of such estimates, but I suppose a
google search is as good as it's likely to get: something like, "what is
reasonable search copyright owner." I did that and got a lot of
interesting things, but no definition of a reasonable search in any
medium (for any type of work). Let's get busy!!

G


Georgia Harper
Scholarly Communications Advisor
University of Texas at Austin Libraries
512.495.4653; 512.971.4325 (c)

-----Original Message-----
From: M. Claire Stewart [mailto:claire-stewart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 2:34 PM
To: digital-copyright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Orphan works: due diligence prior to copying

Hello,

This question has come up twice in different contexts over the past
month, so I thought I'd ask the list:

I'm looking for a set of procedures that a library would follow in
attempting to secure permission to copy before making a decision that
the work is likely an orphan. Does anyone have anything to recommend?
I'm already aware of Denise Troll Covey's excellent CLIR publication
on securing permissions for digitizing books, but would love to have
other examples, articles, etc.

With thanks,
Claire
--
____________________________________________________
M. Claire Stewart
Head, Digital Collections
Northwestern University Library
(847) 467-1437
claire-stewart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://hdl.handle.net/2166/claire