I recently purchased a copy of a DVD at the request of a professor. I believe that the professor intends to show this film in class. The DVD is relevant to course materials.
Before we jump into things, let me first offer this unambiguous assurance: Doubts, begone! The use you contemplated is allowed by law.
Okay, with that out of the way, let's break it down.
Many libraries/archives hold unpublished materials whose creators are deceased, but are still protected by copyright since copyright lasts 70 years after death.
Many libraries do indeed have materials[1] that are unpublished, one-of-a kind, original works, such as photographs, letters, drawings, and recordings.
Some of these works may have significant financial value, while some may be more valuable in terms of local history and culture.
[This question comes from a regional BOCES.]
Our technology integration specialist suggested that we use an AI tool to re-level books/text by an original author to a more appropriate reading level for students who are struggling. This is now being used regularly with our special education staff for students who are struggling readers. Is this an infringement of copyright?
In the spirit of learning, I am going to answer this question in a multiple-choice quiz. For purposes of the quiz, we’ll use the member’s term “re-level” for generating simplified versions of curricular materials.
[NOTE: If you are not feeling playful and just need the answer, please read footnote #2 and skip to the “Final Paragraphs” section of this response.]
The library has been discussing new ways to handle our discards. A senior staff member of a very significant local library told us recently that they donate their discards to the Internet Archive.
Because it would muddy the core element of this question (Should we have any concerns with donating our discards to [Internet Archive]?), this answer is not going to address the various legal and regulatory requirements different libraries may have when it comes to disposing of discarded books.[1]
[We got a question from an academic library...]
I have a question about using copyrighted materials in my classes.
The question is: what legal ways can I share these lectures with students?
The answers are:
1. List the video series in the syllabus as a course material to acquire (I know...."BOOO").
We have received several questions about setting graduation ceremonies to music and streaming them or recording them and sharing them with students. What are the laws surrounding this? There seems to be a lot of misinformation out there. Below is a question I received:
The need to migrate ceremonies online has created a tsunami of copyright concerns. What is a ceremony without the right music? But this question pertains specifically to high school graduations for public schools, so we’ll confine it to those institutions.
We at [redacted higher ed institution] are considering digitizing our past yearbooks and storing them in an institutional repository which has the option of materials being password protected or available publicly. We are also considering using these photos in future advertising materials.
We have had a lot of questions about yearbooks over the years of Ask the Lawyer.[1] We'll answer this submission with the understanding that for those who want further and deeper information, there's more to read in the "ATL" vault.
An academic librarian relayed this question from a researcher/author:
First, some validation: the faculty member is wise to be considering this issue, since publishing contracts[1] almost always put the responsibility and liability for photo clearances on the author.
The CASE Act has a provision for libraries to preemptively opt out of CCB proceedings. If we opt out at the institutional level, does that cover individual library employees?
Opting out seems like a good course of action for our institution but I wonder if there are reasons why we should not opt out.
For this question, "Ask the Lawyer" brought in "Authorlaw.com" and copyright attorney at the Law Office of Stephanie Adams, Sallie Randolph, as a guest author. Many thanks to Sallie for crafting this answer as the CASE Act unfolds.
My institution subscribes to the "Kurzweil Reading Program", a "Text-to-Speech" product for those with reading impairments (dyslexia, English language learners, blind/vision impaired, etc.)
Section 121 indicates these users are "eligible persons" for "fair use", but others, without such disabilities could use the program (like an audiobook in the car!).
This question reflects the level of savvy "Ask the Lawyer" readers bring to their submissions. The member submitting the question has already set out (in a manner much more succinct than I usually achieve) the interplay of:
