chat loading...
Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

Interlibrary Loan: Copyright

Copyright Information

Welcome - Copyright at UWS - LibGuides at University of the West of Scotland

Image source: https://uws-uk.libguides.com/Copyright

Copyright

HPU Libraries is committed to acquiring and disseminating intellectual materials to library patrons in a fair, ethical and legal manner

The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later use, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement.

HPU Libraries reserves the right to refuse a copying request if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.  By submitting a request you agree to comply with these restrictions.

 For more information on Copyright law and fair use, please refer to Section 107 &108 of the US Copyright law here.
 
For additional information on Copyright law and the reproduction of copyrighted works, please visit here.
 
*-Information on copyright law provided by Yale University Interlibrary loan research guide.

CONTU Guidelines

CONTU Guidelines on Photocopying under Interlibrary Loan Arrangements

The CONTU guidelines were developed to assist librarians and copyright proprietors in un­derstanding the amount of photocopying for use in interlibrary loan arrangements permitted un­der the copyright law. In the spring of 1976 there was realistic expectation that a new copy­right law, under consideration for nearly twenty years, would be enacted during that session of Congress. It had become apparent that the House subcommittee was giving serious con­sideration to modifying the language concerning “systematic reproduction” by libraries in Section 108(g) (2) of the Senate-passed bill to permit photocopying under interlibrary arrangements, unless such arrangements resulted in the bor­rowing libraries obtaining “such aggregate quan­tities as to substitute for a subscription to or purchase of” copyrighted works.219

The Commission discussed this proposed amendment to the Senate bill at its meeting on April 2, 1976. Pursuant to a request made at that meeting by the Register of Copyrights, serving in her ex officio role, the Commission agreed that it might aid the House and Senate subcommittees by offering its good offices in bringing the principal parties together to see whether agreement could be reached on a defi­nition of “such aggregate quantities.” This offer was accepted by the House and Senate subcom­mittees and the interested parties, and much of the summer of 1976 was spent by the Commis­sion in working with the parties to secure agree­ment on guidelines” interpreting what was to become the proviso in Section 108(g) (2) relating to “systematic reproduction” by li­braries. The pertinent parts of that section, with the proviso added by the House emphasized, follow:

(g) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section extend to the isolated and un­related reproduction or distribution of a single copy or phonorecord of the same material on separate occasions, but do not extend to cases where the library or archives, or its employee...

(2) engages in the systematic reproduction or distribution of single or multiple copies or phono­records of material described in subsection (d): Provided, that nothing in this clause prevents a library or archives from participating in interlibrary arrangements that do not have, as their purpose or effect, that the library or archives re­ceiving such copies or phonorecords for distribu­tion does so in such aggregate quantities as to substitute for a subscription to or purchase of such work.

Before enactment of the new copyright law, the principal library, publisher, and author or­ganizations agreed to the following detailed guidelines defining what “aggregate quantities” would constitute the “systematic reproduction” that would exceed the statutory limitations on a library’s photocopying activities.

Photocopying - Interlibrary Arrangements

Introduction

Subsection 108 (g) (2) of the bill deals, among other things, with limits on interlibrary arrange­ments for photocopying. It prohibits systematic photocopying of copyrighted materials but per­mits interlibrary arrangements “that do not have, as their purpose or effect, that the library or archives receiving such copies or phonorecords for distribution does so in such aggregate quan­tities as to substitute for a subscription to or purchase of such work.”

The National Commission on New Technolog­ical Uses of Copyrighted Works offered its good offices to the House and Senate subcommittees in bringing the interested parties together to see if agreement could be reached on what a realistic definition would be of “such aggregate quan­tities.” The Commission consulted with the parties and suggested the interpretation which follows, on which there has been substantial agreement by the principal library, publisher, and author organizations. The Commission considers the guidelines which follow to be a workable and fair interpretation of the intent of the pro­viso portion of subsection 108(g) (2).

These guidelines are intended to provide guid­ance in the application of section 108 to the most frequently encountered interlibrary case: a li­brary’s obtaining from another library, in lieu of interlibrary loan, copies of articles from relatively {Page 55} recent issues of periodicals - those published within five years prior to the date of the request. The guidelines do not specify what aggregate quantity of copies of an article or articles pub­lished in a periodical, the issue date of which is more than five years prior to the date when the request for the copy thereof is made, constitutes a substitute for a subscription to such periodical. The meaning of the proviso to subsection 108(g)(2) in such case is left to future interpretation.

The point has been made that the present prac­tice on interlibrary loans and use of photocopies in lieu of loans may be supplemented or even largely replaced by a system in which one or more agencies or institutions, public or private, exist for the specific purpose of providing a cen­tral source for photocopies. Of course, these guidelines would not apply to such a situation.

Guidelines for the Proviso of Subsection 108(g) (2)

1. As used in the proviso of subsection 108 (g) (2), the words “. . . such aggregate quanti­ties as to substitute for a subscription to or purchase of such work” shall mean.

(a)        with respect to any given periodical (as opposed to any given issue of a periodical), filled requests of a library or archives (a “re­questing entity”) within any calendar year for a total of six or more copies of an article or articles published in such periodical within five years prior to the date of the request. These guidelines specifically shall not apply, directly or indirectly, to any request of a requesting entity for a copy or copies of an article or articles published in any issue of a periodical, the publication date of which is more than five years prior to the date when the request is made. These guidelines do not define the mean­ing, with respect to such a request, of “. . . such aggregate quantities as to substitute for a sub­scription to [such periodical].”

(b)        With respect to any other material de­scribed in subsection 108(d), (including fiction and poetry), filled requests of a requesting entity within any calendar year for a total of six or more copies or phonorecords of or from any given work (including a collective work) during the entire period when such material shall be protected by copyright.

2. In the event that a requesting entity:

(a)  shall have in force or shall have entered an order for a subscription to a periodical, or

(b)  has within its collection, or shall have entered an order for, a copy or phonorecord of any other copyrighted work, material from either category of which it desires to obtain by copy from another library or archives (the “supplying entity”), because the material to be copied is not reasonably available for use by the requesting entity itself, then the fulfillment of such request shall be treated as though the requesting entity made such copy from its own collection. A library or archives may request a copy or phonorecord from a supplying entity only under those circumstances where the re­questing entity would have been able, under the other provisions of section 108, to supply such copy from materials in its own collection.

3. No request for a copy or phonorecord of any material to which these guidelines apply may be fulfilled by the supplying entity unless such request is accompanied by a representation by the requesting entity that the request was made in conformity with these guidelines.

4. The requesting entity shall maintain records of all requests made by it for copies or phono­records of any materials to which these guidelines apply and shall maintain records of the fulfill­ment of such requests, which records shall be retained until the end of the third complete calendar year after the end of the calendar year in which the respective request shall have been made.

5. As part of the review provided for in sub-section 108(i), these guidelines shall be reviewed not later than five years from the effective date of this bill.

These guidelines were accepted by the Con­ference Committee and were incorporated into its report on the new act.220 During the ensuing twenty months, both library and publisher or­ganizations have reported considerable progress toward adapting their practices to conform with the CONTU guidelines.

The guidelines specifically leave the status of periodical articles more than five years old to future determination. Moreover, institutions set up for the specific purpose of supplying photo­copies of copyrighted material are excluded from coverage of the guidelines.

Next section: Volume of Library Photocopying in 1976


219 94th Cong., 2d sess., 1975, S. Rept. 22.

220 Conference Report, supranote 1, pp.71-73.