Tag Archives: Copyright Office

anticircumvention exemption rule published

I’m going to try to summarize the newly published exemption to the anticircumvention rules, but it will take a while because it’s complicated as heck. For our class of university folks, it’s better, BUT — .

The “but” will take a while to explore. In the meantime, my less educational and informative assessment of this rulemaking:

The prolixity of this rulemaking puts it into its own special hell of inaccessible, unintelligible, crazy-making meshugaas / mishegas. It makes me nostalgic for the glory days of 2000, 2003, when at least you could read the exception. Can’t they just “publish any class of copyrighted works”?

Is this the kind of fine regulatory work we could expect even more of from a newly independent Office?

On medical devices and all the other really nutty stuff they were dealing with: The CO really should have been bold and broadened the run-around they did on printer cartridges in ’06, beefing it up with a little misuse …. As Cathy Gellis points out, they go the extra mile on interpreting their authority in some instances, so why not here, in areas where they are so clearly not competent?

The hubris of the CO really thinking they can and should opine on copyright and its appropriate boundaries in these contexts is astonishing. My read on the embargo is them trying to give time to weigh in post-publication, because they needed to get the decision out — Maria Pallante (the Register of Copyrights) is nothing if not diligent about deadlines.

See also:

share: twitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Comments on Copyright Office Mass Digitization Proposal

I submitted comments on behalf of the Boston Library Consortium today to the Copyright Office in its “Notice of Inquiry  on Mass Digitization“, and the Copyright Office’s proposal of an Extended Collective Licensing regime.

Thanks to Terry Burton, Ryan Maloney, Charlotte Roh, and Jeremy Smith, for helpful editing; to Robert Cox (UMass Amherst) and Christian Dupont (Boston College) for supplying project details; and to Susan Stearns for leading the charge for BLC to speak out on this important issue.

Further Reading

Other commenters

share: twitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Comment on Copyright Office Visual Works Notice of Inquiry

July 23, 2015

The University Libraries at UMass Amherst filed a comment with the Copyright Office in its Notice of Inquiry on Visual Works.  Focusing on Questions 4 and 5, we sought to illuminate the ways in which images are used in teaching.

Click here to 
download the PDF file.

Other comments:


share: twitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Orphan Works Notice of Inquiry from the Copyright Office

“Orphan Works” (Feb. 2013).The US Copyright Office has posted a “notice of inquiry” on orphan works and mass digitization.  Comments are due Feb. 4, 2013.

“Orphan Works” (Dec 2012). The US Copyright Office has posted a “notice of inquiry” on orphan works and mass digitization. The Scholarly Communication Office is drafting a comment explaining the interests and projects of the Five Colleges in using orphan works. Please contact Laura Quilter if you work, or would like to work, with orphan works, and would like to be represented in or informed about the Comment. Comments are due Feb. 6, 2012.

share: twitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather