Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 22:22:17 -0800 From: John McChesney-Young <bread@earthlink.net> To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg1004$foo@default> Subject: Copyright and fair use
The time limitation is that copyright expires 50 years after the author
has died. For anonymous and pseudonymous works copyright expires 75
years from the date of first publication or 100 years from the date of
creation, whichever comes first. Does anyone know when (or if?) Danser
died?
The Library of Congress has a lengthy document on copyright and fair use
at:
http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ21
This comes from that site:
The following is a reprint of the entire text of section 107 of
title 17, United States Code.
Section 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use
of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or
phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for
purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching
(including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or
research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining
whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair
use the factors to be considered shall include--
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether
such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit
educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation
to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value
of the copyrighted work.
(end excerpt)
Much of the document is devoted to the question of institutional
copying, specifically multiple copying of portions of books for students
and copying by libraries. Although there was nothing specific to the
question at hand of personal copying of an entire out-of-print book, a
section did mention that a library is permitted to photocopy an entire
book if it is unavailable at a "fair" price and some genuine effort has
gone into attempts to obtain it. It seems to me (but I'm no lawyer) that
the purpose of the law is to protect the financial interests of the
author and publisher, and if there is no practical way to pay them, it
is morally acceptable to photocopy a book if it's unavailable new and
you can't find it used.
> >Danser, B(enedictus) H(ubertus) (1928) "The Nepenthaceae of the
> >Netherlands Indies", Bulletin du Jardin Botanique Buitenzorg, Ser.
> >III, 9 (3-4): 249-438.
>
> >Try to get photocopies from a library.
> >
> >Kind regards
> >Jan
>
> The entire thing Jan? Is this legal? Is this moral?
>
> Heather in NZ
(another message:)
> Many used/out-of-print/rare books that I have sought (including both
> of Slack's books, Lloyd's original edition, and a ridiculous number of
> natural history/biology/statistics/music books) I have found by asking a
> dealer to do a book search--some dealers specialize in such things, and as
> far as I know few if any charge for the service.
Book dealers don't charge for the service, but they do, of necessity,
mark up the books as they pass them on from their source to you, the
buyer. Booksellers have to make a profit or they can't survive. The
amount varies according to the dealer; it may be a flat rate or it may
be a percentage. Doubling is not uncommon. This is in addition to any
increases at the source. "Hmm. Someone wants that old thing? Maybe it's
worth more than I thought. I'll quote $20, not the $10 it's marked." So
you may end up being quoted a price quite a bit more than you expected.
Of course, the dealers have to keep in mind that if they quote too high,
their chances of a sale are diminished (the general rule is that a price
for the book is quoted to the ultimate buyer without obligation before
it leaves the shelf).
John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:00 PST