 home > groups > active > proactive > 215 > August 2001 |
|||
ACTive ALIAproACTiveNumber 215: August 2001ACTive ALIA convenor's columnPoor licence agreements - your input is neededCan you give us any evidence of restrictive contracts and licences that have been signed by your libraries? As copyright material is increasingly made available in digital media, the issue of the relationship between the copyright law and contract law has become more and more important. Digital material is frequently subject to licence agreements that override the public's right to use material in ways that are guaranteed by exceptions in the Copyright Act. It has been suggested that contract law will one day come to wholly replace copyright law, with the rules governing the use of information set unilaterally by the vendor rather than by Parliament. This could mean that many of the rights that the public and library community hold dear, such as the right to borrow or lend material, to make fair dealing copies, to sell copies or even to read, may ultimately be lost. And this process will only be exacerbated by the use of technological protection systems such as encryption. The Copyright Law Review Committee (CLRC), an independent advisory body established by the Government to look at specific copyright matters, is currently examining the question of copyright versus contract. The terms of reference and an issues paper can be found at http://www.law.gov.au/clrc/pres_ref/what_Committee_doing.htm. Submissions from the public are invited and must be lodged with the CLRC by 10 August 2001. I encourage you to make a submission on this important issue which may well have an impact on how we gain access to and use information in this country for some time to come. Alternatively, if you have a point of view or a useful anecdote or statistical evidence on this issue, please tell the two collectors of evidence below. The very first thing the CLRC is looking for is proof that restrictive licence agreements exist (licence agreements that forbid you from doing things that the law allows, such as document supply, preservation copying or even fair dealing copying). Any examples of restrictive licence agreements or clauses would be most welcome. They do not have to be the worst licence agreements ever, just restrictive in some way. They are particularly interested in a range of agreements, from properly negotiated agreements (such as consortia agreements) to ordinary library licence agreements to mass-market consumer agreements. They are also looking for agreements to do with non-digital material. Is there print material that is bound by similar licence conditions? Do not send commercial-in-confidence agreements but it would be useful to know about such agreements and what they cover. Any information you can provide would be a great help. Without input from librarians, there is not a lot they can say to Government about this problem and Government will assume there is no problem. The issue is also of concern to the new ALIA Copyright and Intellectual Property Committee, of which I am a member. The two people to send any information to are Michelle Baird and Nick Smith:
Nick Smith
Michelle Baird |
|
