oct06c2.indd Andy Bridges W a s h i n g t o n H o t l i n e Possible revision to Copyright Act In spring 2005, the U.S. Copyright Offi ce and the Library of Congress formed a study group to investigate whether Section 108 of the Copyright Act should be updated, considering the increasing use of digital technologies and network­based resources. Thus far, the study group has focused on access to digital copies and two new exemptions addressing preserva­ tion­only copies and Web site harvesting. ALA and the Association of Research Librar­ ies (ARL) convened a meeting of digital pres­ ervation librarians as well as representatives from other library, museum, and archival as­ sociations to discuss these proposals in depth and develop a “white paper” that represents the library, museum, and archive stance on Section 108. The white paper—“The Libraries’ Position on Access and Digital Preservation: A Response to the Section 108 Study Group”—is now available on the ALA Washington Offi ce’s Copyright page (www.ala.org/ala/washoff /WOissues/copyrightb/copyright.htm), and ALA welcomes any additional feedback on the document from its members. Section 108 provides for libraries and ar­ chives to make reproductions of copyrighted works, under certain conditions, without seeking permission from the copyright holder. For example, libraries may photocopy journal articles and send these copies to other libraries through interlibrary loan. This section also al­ lows libraries to make copies for preservation and replacement purposes. With the rapid growth of modern technolo­ gies, including the rise of the Internet and the spread of digitization, potential modifi cation to Section 108 could include: • Provisions for preserving documents and Web sites that were created in digital form or “born digital”; • New parameters for off­site access to digital replacement copies; Andy Bridges is communications specialist at ALA’s Washington Offi ce, e-mail: abridges@alawash.org • Provisions for making replacement or pres­ ervation copies of items that are “at risk”; • Revisiting the scope of institutions eligible for Section 108 exceptions. While these issues are of the utmost impor­ tance, ALA and ARL, after their in­depth meet­ ing with experts, do not believe that signifi cant changes to the Section 108 statute are neces­ sary at this time. It’s true that technological innovation is driving changes in institutional roles and the development of new practices and standards. But, given the pace and breadth of change and what is at stake, ALA and ARL believe the best approach to be the reaffi rma­ tion of the fundamental rights and responsibili­ ties of libraries; i.e., to preserve and provide access to the evolving cultural and intellectual record and to provide a legal environment that enables the development of professional and institutional practices necessary to accomplish this mission on behalf of society. Further, should Congress determine that such changes to Section 108 are necessary, ALA and ARL note that experience has shown that flexibility in copyright law is critical, es­ pecially in a time of rapid technological and organizational change. With that in mind, ALA and ARL are rec­ ommending caution in the revision of Section 108. The potential for making mistakes in these early days of network­based resources is high. In summary, their recommendations are: • eliminate the three­copy limit currently part of the preservation and replacement ex­ emptions and replace it with the language “a limited number of copies as reasonably neces­ sary for the permitted purposes,” and • enable remote access to digital preser­ vation and replacement copies with minimal restrictions that match the terms and condi­ tions that existed when the original copies were acquired. If you have feedback you would like to provide regarding the ALA/ARL white paper, please contact Carrie Russell, ALA copyright specialist, at crussell@alawash.org. C&RL News October 2006 576 mailto:crussell@alawash.org mailto:abridges@alawash.org www.ala.org/ala/washoff