"Colleges have a big stake in the outcome of the lawsuit that three publishers, Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, and Sage Publications, brought against Georgia State University officials for copyright infringement. The lawsuit, now in its eighth year, challenged GSU’s policy that allowed faculty members to upload excerpts (mainly chapters) of in-copyright books for students to read and download from online course repositories. Four years ago, a trial court held that 70 of the 75 challenged uses were fair uses. Two years ago, an appellate court sent the case back for a reassessment under a revised fair-use standard. The trial court has just recently ruled that of the 48 claims remaining in the case, only four uses, each involving multiple chapters, infringed. The question now is, What should be the remedy for those four infringements?... Appellate courts generally defer to lower-court fact-finding, especially when the findings are as extensive as in the GSU case. As an author of book chapters (for which I have never been paid, but which I would like students to read) and as a faculty member who posts some in-copyright materials on course websites, I’m rooting for GSU on the coming appeal. If the overwhelming majority of the university’s uses were fair, it doesn’t make sense to impose substantial and costly compliance measures on it. Colleges, students, faculty members, and academic-book-chapter authors will win if the publishers lose once again."
Issues and developments related to IP, AI, and OM, examined in the IP and tech ethics graduate courses I teach at the University of Pittsburgh School of Computing and Information. My Bloomsbury book "Ethics, Information, and Technology", coming in Summer 2025, includes major chapters on IP, AI, OM, and other emerging technologies (IoT, drones, robots, autonomous vehicles, VR/AR). Kip Currier, PhD, JD
Showing posts with label Sage Publications. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sage Publications. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Colleges Shouldn’t Have to Deal With Copyright Monitoring; Chronicle of Higher Education, 5/17/16
Pamela Samuelson, Chronicle of Higher Education; Colleges Shouldn’t Have to Deal With Copyright Monitoring:
Monday, May 21, 2012
Georgia State Copyright Case: What You Need To Know—and What It Means for E-Reserves; LibraryJournal.com, 5/17/12
Meredith Schwartz, LibraryJournal.com; Georgia State Copyright Case: What You Need To Know—and What It Means for E-Reserves:
"One of the most closely watched e-reserve cases in recent memory came to an end—though an appeal is still possible—on May 11, when Judge Orinda Evans of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ruled in Cambridge University Press (CUP); Oxford University Press (OUP); Sage Publications v. Georgia State University (GSU). The case alleged copyright infringement in GSU’s e-reserves, and in essence the judge came down on the side of libraries in a 350-page decision delivered almost a year after she heard closing arguments.
Of the 75 cases of alleged infringement she considered, Judge Evans held five to be infringement. The rest were either held to be fair use, or the question did not arise, because the copying was held to be de minimis—when virtually no one actually read the posted work—or because the publishers did not demonstrate to the court’s satisfaction that they had standing to make the claim."
"One of the most closely watched e-reserve cases in recent memory came to an end—though an appeal is still possible—on May 11, when Judge Orinda Evans of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ruled in Cambridge University Press (CUP); Oxford University Press (OUP); Sage Publications v. Georgia State University (GSU). The case alleged copyright infringement in GSU’s e-reserves, and in essence the judge came down on the side of libraries in a 350-page decision delivered almost a year after she heard closing arguments.
Of the 75 cases of alleged infringement she considered, Judge Evans held five to be infringement. The rest were either held to be fair use, or the question did not arise, because the copying was held to be de minimis—when virtually no one actually read the posted work—or because the publishers did not demonstrate to the court’s satisfaction that they had standing to make the claim."
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
The GSU Lawsuit: You Don't Know How Lucky You Are | Peer to Peer Review; Library Journal, 5/19/11
Barbara Fister, Library Journal; The GSU Lawsuit: You Don't Know How Lucky You Are | Peer to Peer Review:
"Three publishers—Sage, Cambridge, and Oxford University Press—want to return us to those good old days, only without any subtlety about fair use or four factors tests. The lawsuit (partly funded by the copyright fees that we pay to the Copyright Clearance Center) that pits scholarly presses against a university and its library and, by extension, the faculty and students who use their e-reserves system, has gone to trial, and the outcome the publishers have demanded, if they prevail, would seriously turn the clock back."
"Three publishers—Sage, Cambridge, and Oxford University Press—want to return us to those good old days, only without any subtlety about fair use or four factors tests. The lawsuit (partly funded by the copyright fees that we pay to the Copyright Clearance Center) that pits scholarly presses against a university and its library and, by extension, the faculty and students who use their e-reserves system, has gone to trial, and the outcome the publishers have demanded, if they prevail, would seriously turn the clock back."
Monday, October 11, 2010
Georgia State Ereserves Case Narrowed Yet Again; Library Journal, 10/7/10
Josh Hadro, Library Journal; Georgia State Ereserves Case Narrowed Yet Again:
"According to a ruling on October 1, the closely watched Georgia State University (GSU) ereserves lawsuit will come down to whether the named defendants participated in the specific act of "contributory infringement," as two other original accusations were removed from the case.
This narrows the scope of the charges lodged by the publisher plaintiffs—Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, and SAGE Publications—and has Fair Use advocates cautiously optimistic as the case moves closer to trial."
http://www.libraryjournal.com/lj/home/887124-264/georgia_state_ereserves_case_narrowed.html.csp
"According to a ruling on October 1, the closely watched Georgia State University (GSU) ereserves lawsuit will come down to whether the named defendants participated in the specific act of "contributory infringement," as two other original accusations were removed from the case.
This narrows the scope of the charges lodged by the publisher plaintiffs—Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, and SAGE Publications—and has Fair Use advocates cautiously optimistic as the case moves closer to trial."
http://www.libraryjournal.com/lj/home/887124-264/georgia_state_ereserves_case_narrowed.html.csp
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)