学术特刊与版权的神话

T. Schultz, Dana Miller
{"title":"学术特刊与版权的神话","authors":"T. Schultz, Dana Miller","doi":"10.17161/jcel.v3i3.7887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study compares the copyright and use policy statements posted on the websites of the special collections of Association of Research Libraries member libraries. In spring 2018, 99 academic special collections websites were viewed, and data was collected based on the following: 1) presence and content of a general copyright statement; 2) mention of copyright owners besides the special collections; 3) presence and accuracy of statements regarding fair use and public domain; 4) policies for patron-made copies; 5) whether the special collections required its permission and/or the copyright owner’s permission to publish; 6) whether any use or license fees were charged and how clearly fees were presented. Authors analyzed whether these policies reflect copyright law or went beyond it, unnecessarily restricting the use of materials or imposing fees where rights are in question. A majority of the sites included general copyright statements, mentioned other copyright owners, and mentioned fair use, but only a minority mentioned the public domain. Just more than half restricted how patrons could use patron-made copies. About half required the special collections’ permission to publish a copy, and a fifth said any third-party owner’s permission was also required for publication.","PeriodicalId":354781,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Copyright in Education & Librarianship","volume":"73 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Academic Special Collections and the Myths of Copyright\",\"authors\":\"T. Schultz, Dana Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.17161/jcel.v3i3.7887\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study compares the copyright and use policy statements posted on the websites of the special collections of Association of Research Libraries member libraries. In spring 2018, 99 academic special collections websites were viewed, and data was collected based on the following: 1) presence and content of a general copyright statement; 2) mention of copyright owners besides the special collections; 3) presence and accuracy of statements regarding fair use and public domain; 4) policies for patron-made copies; 5) whether the special collections required its permission and/or the copyright owner’s permission to publish; 6) whether any use or license fees were charged and how clearly fees were presented. Authors analyzed whether these policies reflect copyright law or went beyond it, unnecessarily restricting the use of materials or imposing fees where rights are in question. A majority of the sites included general copyright statements, mentioned other copyright owners, and mentioned fair use, but only a minority mentioned the public domain. Just more than half restricted how patrons could use patron-made copies. About half required the special collections’ permission to publish a copy, and a fifth said any third-party owner’s permission was also required for publication.\",\"PeriodicalId\":354781,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Copyright in Education & Librarianship\",\"volume\":\"73 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Copyright in Education & Librarianship\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17161/jcel.v3i3.7887\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Copyright in Education & Librarianship","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17161/jcel.v3i3.7887","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究比较了美国研究图书馆协会(Association of Research Libraries)成员图书馆在网站上发布的特殊馆藏的版权和使用政策声明。2018年春季,对99个学术特藏网站进行了浏览,数据收集基于以下几个方面:1)一般版权声明的存在和内容;(二)除专藏外,注明著作权人;3)有关合理使用和公共领域声明的存在和准确性;4)赞助人制作副本的政策;(五)特辑是否经其许可及/或著作权人许可方可出版;6)是否收取使用费或许可费,以及费用的说明有多清楚。作者们分析了这些政策是反映了版权法,还是超越了版权法,不必要地限制了材料的使用,或者在有权利问题的地方征收了费用。大多数网站包括一般版权声明,提到其他版权所有者,并提到合理使用,但只有少数提到公共领域。只有一半以上的学校限制了顾客使用自己制作的副本。大约一半的图书需要得到特殊馆藏的许可才能出版,五分之一的图书表示出版还需要得到任何第三方所有者的许可。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Academic Special Collections and the Myths of Copyright
This study compares the copyright and use policy statements posted on the websites of the special collections of Association of Research Libraries member libraries. In spring 2018, 99 academic special collections websites were viewed, and data was collected based on the following: 1) presence and content of a general copyright statement; 2) mention of copyright owners besides the special collections; 3) presence and accuracy of statements regarding fair use and public domain; 4) policies for patron-made copies; 5) whether the special collections required its permission and/or the copyright owner’s permission to publish; 6) whether any use or license fees were charged and how clearly fees were presented. Authors analyzed whether these policies reflect copyright law or went beyond it, unnecessarily restricting the use of materials or imposing fees where rights are in question. A majority of the sites included general copyright statements, mentioned other copyright owners, and mentioned fair use, but only a minority mentioned the public domain. Just more than half restricted how patrons could use patron-made copies. About half required the special collections’ permission to publish a copy, and a fifth said any third-party owner’s permission was also required for publication.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信