Copyright legislation in the UK changed significantly in 2014, and this article provides an overview to some of the most relevant changes to the exceptions1 in copyright law that can be used by archivists and librarians. Subscribers to ALJ will have read Tim Padfield's excellent introduction to UK copyright law for art librarians in 2012, much of which is still relevant and will not be repeated here. Given the varied nature of art library and archive collections in the UK, and the complex nature of the law in this area, it is intended that the following general guidance to the 2014 legislative changes will highlight areas for further study: such basic guidance should not be used to inform internal policy or decision-making. The article also includes a list of sources for more detailed information on the law, in the references section.
Purpose The inability of cultural institutions to make available digital reproductions of collected material highlights a shortcoming with the existing copyright framework in a number of national jurisdictions. Overlapping efforts to remedy the situation were recently undertaken in the form of EU Directive 2012/28/EU, the “Orphan Works” directive, and a new licensing scheme introduced by the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO). The purpose of this paper is to empirically evaluate both the EU and UK policy approaches, drawing on data collected during a live rights clearance simulation. Design/methodology/approach The authors attempted to clear rights in a sample of 432 items contained in the mixed-media Edwin Morgan Scrapbooks collection held by the University of Glasgow Library. Data were collected on the resource costs incurred at each stage of the rights clearance process, from initial audit of the collection, through to compliance with diligent search requirements under EU Directive 2012/28/EU and the UKIPO licensing procedures. Findings Comparing results against the two current policy options for the use of orphan works, the authors find that the UKIPO licensing scheme offers a moderate degree of legal certainty but also the highest cost to institutions (the cost of diligent search in addition to licence fees). The EU exception to copyright provides less legal certainty in the case of rightsholder re-emergence, but also retains high diligent search costs. Both policy options may be suitable for institutions wishing to make use of a small number of high-risk works, but neither approach is currently suitable for mass digitisation. Research limitations/implications This rights clearance exercise is focussed on a single case study with unique properties (with a high proportion of partial works embedded in a work of bricolage). Consequently, the results obtained in this study reflect differences from simulation studies on other types of orphan works. However, by adopting similar methodological and reporting standards to previous empirical studies, the authors can compare rights clearance costs between collections of different works. Originality/value This study is the first to empirically assess the 2014 UK orphan works licensing scheme from an institutional perspective. The authors hope that it will contribute to an understanding of how policy could more effectively assist libraries and archives in their digitisation efforts.
Jane Secker returns with the follow-up to the first edition of Copyright and E-Learning, with a new co-author in Chris Morrison and lots of guidance on copyright for staff working with elearning tools in a variety of contexts. The authors both have experience working in copyright compliance and digital literacy within the Higher Education sector, and are well-known for providing copyright training online and in-person through UK Copyright Literacy (http://copyrightliteracy.org). Through my own work in copyright education, I have used the Copyright Card Game they developed as part of my training sessions, and I've found it to be a highly engaging and effective learning tool for what is often seen as a dry, difficult subject. I have looked forward to the publication of this new edition.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.