 |
 |
----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Max, this is alarming. Is this language in the drafts that are available to the public? I know I was dismayed to see in one version a list of participating organizations, followed by a place for the signatory organizations. The language means that the participants agreed on this version of the guidelines. It doesn't mean that all the organizations have agreed, I believe. I think all we can do is urge our representatives to change the language to reflect the controversy, and then, whether that is successful or not, to rely on the absense of many names as final signatories. Maryly SNow UC Berkeley > > ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > This message is being cross-posted to VRA-L and ARLIS-L. Please pardon any > redundancy! > > Dear colleagues, > > We in the Yale Library are alarmed to read, in the draft report to the > Commissioner of Patents on the CONFU process, that Digital Images are > presented as an agreed-upon set of guidelines. The only two guidelines that > are presented as failed are ILL and reserves, for different reasons. The > "results" section states that digital images, as well as distance learning > and educational multimedia, are done and apparently agreed upon, at least in > large part. These guideline apparently will become part of the legislative > history so they can be referenced in connection with the Copyright Act > provisions on fair use. > > I believe this language misrepresents the Digital Images situation > significantly, and am especially concerned about the guidelines being > referenced as legislative history. This is surely a disturbing prospect for > all of us who are, or plan to be, engaged with the educational use of analog > and digital visual resources collections. Is there any way that we or our > representatives to the CONFU enterprise can influence and change the > internal language of this draft to reflect the considerable controversy that > exists within the groups (VRA, ARLIS/NA, CAA, ARL, among others) engaged > with this part of the CONFU process? > > We have until Nov 18 to submit comments. > > Max Marmor > Yale >