ACRL recently released its Final Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. It reminds us that users, whether college students or not, start with the perception that information is “free” and lack understanding of how personal information is being commodified.The third frame – “Information has value” – addresses the complex values associated with information by introducing concepts of publishing and intellectual property. It speaks of information “as a commodity, as a means of education, as a means to influence, and as a means of negotiating and understanding the world. Legal and socioeconomic interests influence information production and dissemination.” Read the full framework for tools to incorporate in your reference consults, training or teaching.
Over the next couple days, CRIV will be highlighting some of the vendor relations-themed offerings at AALL in Seattle…
F5: Mass Digitization in the Law Library: Obstacles and Opportunities
Time: 8:30am – 9:45am
Copyright law is one of the greatest obstacles to mass digitization; the Google Books and HathiTrust cases vividly illustrate the problem. This session will explore those legal challenges, and will discuss new approaches to enabling mass digitization and access. The session will highlight how fair use and best practices can be used to address orphan works (i.e., works whose copyright owners cannot be located), and will explain strategies for how law libraries can more realistically balance the risk of copyright infringement against the risk of failing to provide users with effective digital access to the incredible wealth of materials in their collections. For more information about the research work of these scholars, see http://www.law.berkeley.edu/bclt.htm.
Takeaway 1: Participants will be able to identify the core copyright obstacles facing law libraries that seek to digitize and make available their collections to users.
Takeaway 2: Participants will be able to locate and employ resources, such as best practices, to help make decisions about digitization and use of copyrighted works in their collections.
Takeaway 3: Participants will be able to more accurately assess and balance the risks of using copyrighted works as weighed against the mission risk of failing to provide users with digital access to the library’s historical holdings, a critical part of the collection that retains untapped value in today’s “digital-plus” world.
Who should attend: All law librarians who access historical information in digital format and need to understand the major challenges to making historical material available in such formats; all law librarians who want to stay apprised of the timely, cutting-edge developments in this field
Track(s): Library Management, Information Technology, Reference, Research and Client Services, Collection Development and Cataloging
Victoria K. Trotta, Associate Dean for Information Technology and the Ross-Blakley Law Library, Arizona State University
Dean Rowan, Reference & Research Services Director, University of California School of Law Library, Berkeley
David Hansen, Reference Librarian, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
NYLS Professor of Law James Grimmelmann can always be counted on for immediate, deeply informed, crystalline commentary on the latest IP issues. His blog,The Laboratorium, has an excellent preliminary assessment of the GSU decision here.
It never good for relations between libraries and information vendors when the latter sues the former in federal court. But at least the ruling in the Georgia State University copyright infringement suit might bring some desperately needed clarity to fair use determinations made by academic libraries. The ruling is here. Early expert commentary can be found at Kevin Smith’s excellent blog, Scholarly Communication @ Duke.