ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 82 / C &R L News W hen reviewing all of the necessary factors of an off-campus library service program, it is very clear that such a program is neither simple nor inexpen­ sive. I f a college or university administration makes a com m itm ent to a program for off-campus stu­ dents, then it must also make a proportional com ­ mitm ent to library services. The library, in turn, is obligated to make a clear and concise case of w hat such a com m itm ent entails. A detailed plan of action must be prepared w ith current and pro­ jected expectations and costs of a program as it de­ velops. Understandably, it is difficult to anticipate demand, but some initial review, assessment, and experimentation will help. The investment in off- campus library services can have a profound effect on departm ents throughout the library and the university. ■ ■ Letters Photocopying To the Editor: I read with much interest Mr. Amodeo’s article in the November 1983 issue of C ollege & Research L ibraries News. I f the goal is “Photocopying W ith ­ out (Much) D am age” the checklist of w hat “librar­ ians will have to do…to see that there is something left to copy” should include a plea for respect for the copyright notice on the intellectual property of the author and publisher, don’t you think? W e who create the books and journals for your patrons ap­ plaud your sensitivity in urging your colleagues to take special care with the physical property (e.g., the book) in which the information is embodied. But if you are concerned, as you say in closing your thoughtful article, “that the librarians and staff set a good and consistent exam p le,” your checklist should include suggestions relating to the obliga­ tion to obtain permission from the copyright owner for making the copies and perhaps some explana­ tion of the mechanism for paying photocopying fees through the Copyright Clearance Center. To see that there is something left to copy, as you so clearly put it, it is vital to insure that the creators are rewarded for their efforts and their investment. This is a concept that has been accepted by civilized societies for hundreds of years. Most recently, the Congress of the United States, in recognizing the im portance of such compensation, passed new leg­ islation (Title 17, U .S. Code) to carry out the intent of the copyright protection concept embodied in the United States C onstitution. T he Register of Copyrights, in his report to Congress in January 1983 reaffirm ed the need to have some mechanism whereby the creators of the information are paid for the use of their works. As you and your colleagues in the library com ­ munity know, your ownership of a book does not carry with it the right to make copies of that book. Your reference to “the excessive number of pages copied by the enthusiast in these days of unbridled (copyright law or no) reproduction” falls far short of a productive contribution to this problem. If “excessive” photocopying continues, publishers will no longer be able to publish the kind of short- run m aterial especially needed by college and re­ search libraries. Many librarians act responsibly. Unfortunately, many do not, as witness their ab­ sence from the registration rolls of the Copyright Clearance Center. They are in the process of killing the goose that lays the golden egg.—Allan Witt- man, President, Professional Books Division, M ac­ millan Publishing Com pany, New York. The author responds: Although the question of copyright was not the focus of this article, your point is well taken. The phrase you quote (“the excessive num ber”) was not intended to be flippant but rather to recognize the unfortunate reality of the situation. Most librarians are scrupulous about not copying beyond fair use limits, but libraries have little or no control over the copying of circulating collections; after all, the patron need only jog over to the nearest quick- copying center to reproduce even better copies of whatever s/he wants, and for less money. Follow ­ ing my suggestions would certainly lead to better control over copyright abuse for at least some m a­ terials. In these days of skeleton staffing and m ulti­ plied duties for each librarian and clerk, just fol­ lowing these suggestions can pose some problems; but again, even if hawk-eyed librarians were to pounce on offenders in the library, circulating m a­ terials would still be fair, or rather, unfair game. The advisory signs regarding copyright law posted in libraries, explanation of the law and copyright ethics during library orientation, and strict en­ forcement of fair use regarding materials copied by library staff are about as much as can be done. At the same tim e, publishers can take comfort in the fact that libraries buy a lot of books and jou r­ nals, and pay for the privilege of advertising the publisher’s products. After all, patrons of libraries tend to be buyers of books, and many books and au­ thors are introduced to their buying public via the lib r a r y .— A nthony J. A m o d eo , G len v iew , I lli­ nois. ■■ Correction Ilona G. Franck has been nominated for the office of Secretary of the A C R L Community and Junior College Libraries Section. Her name was spelled incorrectly in the D ecem ber C &R L News.