Search

The Association of Research Libraries' 2012 publication, Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries, focuses heavily on the concept of transformative use within the fair use analysis. In some cases, the Association of Research Libraries advocates for using the entire work in an electronic format for course reserves. However, current approaches to electronic course reserves and fair use/transformative use arguments are not conducive to utilizing the Association of Research Libraries' recommendations. This article attempts to reframe the conversation by examining fair use in a broad context and the role of the class in the fair use analysis.

Librarians with an interest in electronic reserves were, for the most part, disappointed by The Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH Act). The Act provided classroom instructors with relatively clear guidelines as how they could use copyrighted materials online classes without violating the law. Mention of libraries, however, was conspicuously absent and the Act offered no direct guidance for what sort of library materials could be placed on the Internet. The guidance it offers though is more indirect. It gives some sense of how the legislative branch views the rights and responsibilities of educators in the use of online materials. It will offer guidance to the judiciary when, inevitably, a copyright dispute involving electronic reserves ever goes to court. It is important that librarians understand the TEACH Act and what it meansto education.

The relatively short history of electronic reserves has seen many changes in copyright policies, practices and costs. Publishers and aggregators frequently facilitate electronic reserve access to articles through electronic journals, but at present no similar standardized approach to accessing book excerpts exists. For libraries managing copyright for electronic reserves, staff time becomes a costly issue. Current trends in publishers' copyright fees for electronic reserves suggest models that academic libraries will be unable to sustain. Costs may encourage libraries to either choose a very liberal interpretation of fair use, or, to the other extreme, drastically curtail book excerpts for electronic reserves.

The article compares and contrasts the effects of copyright law on interlibrary loan practice in Canada and the United States. Copyright law effects interlibrary loan practice differently in Canada than in the United States. Under U.S. law, interlibrary loan is prohibited in quantities that would substitute for a subscription. Under Canadian law, libraries cannot issue a digital copy of a printed article to a library user. A library cannot send, E-mail, post to a web site for retrieval or use any other electronic method to deliver an item to a patron. A printed, paper copy is the only method allowed. Canadian libraries are required to have licenses from copyright collectives that further effect interlibrary loan and other areas of library practice.

The Library's Circulation Department at Colorado State University-Pueblo began using Docutek's ERes system on a limited basis during fall semester 2002. The nuts and bolts of implementing the ERes system were relatively simple compared to the challenge of revising our reserves policy to accommodate electronic reserves. While the staff realized the necessity of tightening up lax practices that become more glaring in electronic format, convincing the university community proved more challenging.