ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 161 should d e v e lo p , w h ere it d oes not already exist, a system for recogn izing and rewarding staff based on jo b co m p e te n cy and contributions to the library and the p ro fe s sio n . In an a ca d e m ic li­ brary, a system o f recognition and reward might b e reflected in the prom otion in rank or tenure system, consideration o f m erit increm ents, and so forth. Library professionals also receiv e personal satisfaction for their accom p lish m en ts and c o n ­ tributions through the recognition receiv ed from colleagues. C ontinuing education is critical to academ ic li­ braries, and therefore m ajor issues should not be ignored or d row n ed in w ell-in ten tion ed rhetoric. N o w is n ot the tim e for library professionals to on ce again com pare them selves with oth er p ro ­ fessional groups. Instead, con tin u in g ed ucation should b e considered in relation to the needs o f academ ic libraries and the professionals that staff these libraries. I f w e be g in b y defining the pur­ pose and scope o f continuin g education in rela­ tion to these n eed s, w e will b e b e tte r able to identify essential program s and activities as well as mechanisms for recogn izing and rewarding p e r ­ form ance and contributions.— Sheila C reth , Assis­ tant D ir e c to r , University o f C onn ecticut. ■■ Copyright— More Views ONE SOLUTION I am writing not to offer a different interpreta­ tion o f the c o p y rig h t law than that o f C harles Martell, bu t to suggest a solution to the problem o f reserves and to co rre ct three small errors in his “ Summary S h eet.” I b e liev e these errors w ere present in the original p u blication from w h ich this list o f dos and d o n ’ ts was taken and that they w ere caused b y an attem pt to paraphrase the lan­ guage o f the guidelines. First, it is stated that “ a teacher M AY N O T … make m ultiple co p ie s o f a short p oem , arti­ cle, story, o r essay from the same author m ore than on ce in a class term o r make m ultiple copies from the same co lle ctiv e w ork o r periodical issue m ore than three times a term ” (emphasis added). The “ cum ulative effect” test o f the section 107 guid elines, from w h ich this is taken, uses the term “ periodical volu m e" (em phasis added). S econd, it is stated that “ a teacher M AY N O T … make m ultip le c o p ie s o f w orks m ore than nine times in the same class te rm .” T he provision in the “ cum ulative effect” test is “ there shall not b e m o re than n in e instan ces o f such m u ltip le co p y in g f o r o n e c o u r s e d uring o n e class te rm ” (emphasis added). T hird, it is stated that “ a teacher M A Y … make m ultiple co p ie s for classroom use on ly and not to e x ceed on e p e r student in a class o f the fol­ lowing: … on e chart, graph, diagram, drawing, cartoon, or picture p e r book or p eriod ical.” The la n gu a g e in th e “ b r e v i t y " d e fin it io n in th e g u id e lin e s is “ p e r p e r io d ic a l is s u e ” (em phasis added). T u rn in g to the p ro b le m o f reserves, I think there is an alternative that to date I have rarely seen discussed: nam ely, obtaining perm ission to make the copies. It should be recogn ized that the copyright law and its guidelines d o not im pose a flat ban on copyin g; they on ly require that per- C ontin ued on p . 162. COPYRIGHT LAW AND RESERVE OPERATIONS— ANOTHER INTERPRETATION T o sav e s p a c e , th is in t e r p r e t a tio n o f th e copyright law is lim ited to specific points o f dis­ agreement with Charles Martell, including m inor d iffe r e n c e s in em ph asis. In g en eral, M artell’ s reading o f the law seem s sound and his recom ­ m endations w orthw hile. At crucial points, h ow ­ ever, he is content to recom m end seeking legal interpretation instead o f venturing an interpreta­ tion himself. His approach is adm ittedly “ pu rpo­ sively conservative.” H ow ever, perhaps libraries should instead be looking at the law as a lawyer w ould and d e te r­ m ine what w eight the G u idelines w ou ld carry. A dm ittedly they have not the force o f law. But they cam e into bein g at the urging o f the H ouse C om m ittee on the Judiciary. The H ouse C om m it­ tee R eport (H .R . 94-1476) says that the com m it­ tee report o f 1967 summ arizes the arguments on the question o f classroom p h otocop y in g — w hich “ have not changed materially in the intervening years” — and p roceed s with com m ents o f consid ­ erable m om ent, including these passages: … The fair use doctrine in the case o f classroom copying w ould apply prim arily to the situation o f a teacher w ho, acting individually and at his ow n volition, makes on e o r m ore copies for temporary use by him self or his pupils in his classroom. Spontaneous copy in g o f an isolated extract by a teacher, w hich may b e fair use under appropriate circum stances, w ould turn into an infringement if the c o p ie s w e re a ccu m u lated o v e r a p e rio d o f time with other parts o f the same work, or w ere collected with other material from various works so as to constitute an anthology. A key, though not necessarily determ inative, fac­ tor in fair use is w h eth er or not the work is avail- C ontin ued on p .162. 162 O ne Solution, cont. fr o m p. 161. mission b e obtained for copying in excess o f fair use. Our library has d ecid ed to take the initiative in obtaining permission in order to avoid the an­ ticipated hassles with faculty and in order to least disrupt the educational process w e are in busi­ ness to support. The foundation o f our effort is the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (Box 765, Schenectady, NY 12301), an organization form ed by serials publishers to facilitate the obtaining o f permission to copy their serials. O n ce a library is registered with the cen ter it can keep a log o f c o p ie s m ade and n e e d m ake p a y m en ts o n ly monthly or quarterly, depen din g on the volume o f copying it does. The prices per copy are listed on the title pages o f every journal article o f the m em ber publishers, beginning with 1978 issues. T h e c e n t e r also d is tr ib u te s a h a n d b o o k w ith prices for articles before 1978. I am inclined to think that more and m ore publishers will be par­ ticipating in this center. W e are contacting non­ center publishers directly with a form letter ask­ ing permission to copy. In no case, how ever, are w e waiting to receive permission before making copies, since w e do not anticipate any absolute refusals. Our serials department is handling co r­ respondence with serial publishers, and our ac­ quisitions department is handling correspondence for monograph publishers. Fees paid for copying will be assessed to the appropriate departmental allocation within the materials budget. Perhaps my colleagues will think this is undue capitulation and a betrayal o f academic freedom; but it seems to me that w e have an obligation to o b e y the law, and the q u e stio n after that is whether we will ob e y it by refusing to provide the r e se r v e m aterials that stù d en ts n e e d o r whether we will obey it by facilitating the process o f getting permission. Som e libraries may do reserve copying on such a scale that they feel they will not be able to af­ ford to pay for it. This is, o f course, a valid o b je c­ tion, but bear in mind that fees may not always be required; w e have already received a reply from a publisher granting us permission to make a total o f nine copies without charge. W e are not absolutely certain that we will be able to afford it either, but for the time being it seems to us a vi­ able s o lu tio n .—Jack R ay, A ssista n t D ir e c to r , L oyola-N otre D am e L ibrary, Baltimore, M ary­ land. ■■ A nother Interpretation, cont. fro m p. 161. able to the potential user. I f the work is “ out o f print” and unavailable for purchase through nor­ mal channels, the user may have m ore justifica­ tion for reproducing it than in the ordinary case. The Senate Judiciary C om m ittee R eport (S. 94-473) is very clo se in language to the 1967 H ouse report. But a significant statement in a gloss to section 108, though om itted from the conference report (H .R. 94-1733), is at least quite specific: Subsection (g) provides that the rights granted by this section extend only to the “ isolated and unre­ lated reproduction o f a single c o p y ,” but this sec­ tion does not authorize the related or concerted reproduction o f m ultiple copies o f the same mate­ rial whether made on on e occasion or over a p e ­ riod o f time, and w hether intended for aggregate use by one individual or for separate use by the individual m embers o f a group. For example, if a college professor instructs his class to read an ar­ ticle from a copyrighted journal, the school li­ brary would not b e perm itted, under subsection (g), to re p ro d u ce c o p ie s o f the article for the members o f the group. T o sum up this matter, though the Guidelines and the various com m ittee reports in which the Guidelines are incorporated have not the force o f law, they are to be reckoned with. The court o f claims that adjudicated the Williams v. Wilkins Co. case cited the 1967 report with the remark that “ although such com m ents w ere not binding on the court, they w ere influential” (Am erican Law R ep orts. F ed era l C ases and A nnotations, v.21, p.217). A s e c o n d p o in t o f c o n c e r n is that the Guidelines do not take up reserve room coyping, nor d o sections 107 or 108 o f Public Law 94-553. Martell is aware that there is considerable feeling among faculty that reserve room operations are “extensions o f the face-to-face classroom process.” In the light o f the com m ittee reports it seems plain that no such interpretation may be allowed. There are too many o ccu rren ces o f the phrase “classroom use” to suggest that this is accidental; “ instructional” o r “ educational” use might have been used, but they w ere not. Martell is aware o f the many restrictions that would be im posed if reserve use com es under the fair use provisions o f section 107. But what if it is demonstrably akin to the copying d one by librar­ ies on their own initiative under the provisions o f subsection 8? The brevity, spontaneity, and fac­ ulty initiation o f the order then vanish, to be re­ placed by other restrictions not so hard to live with. The fair use provisions remain, but a dif­ ferent interpretation o f fair use prevails. The Senate gloss on subsection 108(g), cited earlier, points up the kinship between 108(g) and reserve room use, though it refers only to multi­ ple copies “ for the m em bers o f the group” with NLA Forum “ Speaking Up For Librarians: A Forum On Professional C oncerns,” W ednesday, June 28, 1978, 10 a.m . to n o o n , C h ic a g o , Illin ois. M oderator: John B erry , e d ito r o f L ib r a ry Journal. Contact: Peter Dollard, Monteith Li­ brary, Alma C ollege, Alma, M I 48801; (517) 463-2141, ext.332. 163 no reference to w here they use the materials. In the most general sense section 108 allows a library to photocopy any o f its own materials in the interests o f “ p reserv ation ” o f the original, w ith o u t any c o m m e r c ia l a d v an tag e and for scholarly purposes, to the extent that other pur­ chasable co p ie s are unavailable at the tim e o f need at a reasonable price. W ith respect to un­ published manuscripts, the principal prohibition applies to copying a manuscript that the copying library does not own. Published works may be copied to replace a copy that is “ damaged, d ete­ riorating, lost, or stolen, if the library or archives has, after a reasonable effort, determ ined that an unused replacem ent cannot be obtained at a fair p r ic e .” S ub sequ en t parts (d) and (e) are c o n ­ cerned with interlibrary loan restrictions, which Martell handles satisfactorily. The terms o f 108(c) cited above, especially the word “ deteriorating,” seem to open the door for m uch reserve room copyin g. W hen a scholarly journal article is assigned for class reading, no one questions the right to place the original in a reserve room. But this w ould create undue wear on a probably bound volum e and would restrict free access to other articles from the same issue or volume. The photocopying o f the article in this case is demonstrably fair use and the same is true o f a chapter from a book. In either case, the li­ brary m ust m ake s o m e e ffo r t to d e te r m in e whether inexpensive reprints are available. The same principles might be extended to m ul­ tiple co p ie s for large classes if the library has taken steps to purchase multiple reprints o f the item. And in the face o f an inability to secure re­ prints, the use o f the same photocopies in successive Cataloging o f Microforms The Subcom mittee on Bibliographic Control o f Microforms, RTS D /R eproduction o f Library Materials Section, will hold an open m eeting at the ALA Annual C o n fe re n ce in Chicago. Starting at 2 p .m ., Sunday, June 25, the dis­ cussion will address the question o f access points peculiar to m icroforms that should be included in an automated cataloging system. The basis o f discussion will be the Library o f Congress statement on A ccess Points f o r Mi­ croform s, which was distributed at the M id­ winter M eeting. The L ibrary o f Congress In­ form ation Bulletin will carry the above state­ ment in a spring issue to enable concerned li­ brarians to be inform ed before the ALA m eet­ ing. All interested persons are urged to add their input on this im portant subject; c o m ­ m ents sh ou ld b e fo rw a rd e d to G r e g C o le (chairman o f the subcom m ittee), Ellis Library, University o f M issouri-C olum bia, Colum bia, M O 65201. school terms is at least defensible, though the library may here be required to get permis­ sion from the copyright h old er at a reasonable cost. Finally, the sharp restrictions in 108(g) to the “ isolated and unrelated reproduction or distribu­ tion o f a single c o p y ” have refe re n ce o n ly to interlibrary loans and have little bearing on li­ brary copy in g for preservation o f deteriorating m aterial.— G erald J. E b erle, D irecto r, Earl K. Long Library, University o f New Orleans. ■■ Oregon ACRL Chapter Meets The O regon A C R L chapter m et at the Lewis & Clark C ollege library in Portland on February 17. Marcia Lowell, state librarian, chaired the m eet­ ing. She discussed the O regon Governor’ s C o n ­ ference scheduled for June 1 -3 and gave back­ ground on planning for the conference. The A C R L m em bers present broke into groups to discuss ideas that should be raised at the co n ­ ference regarding library services, needs, and d e ­ velopm ent. The results w ere presented to Marcia Lowell and Laurelyn Schellin, conferen ce c o o r ­ dinator, to aid in setting an agenda and as expres­ sion o f the concerns o f academ ic librarians. On March 13 the chapter met at Oregon State University to hear Pauline Atherton discuss the subject access project. O n-line catalogs may not be as useful o r accessible as they should be if only LC subject headings are used for descrip­ tion. H e r ex perim en tal p r o je c t expand ed traditiol na s u b je c t a ccess p o in ts to in clu d e sig ­ nificant words from the index and contents page. The file that was created was then searched via the traditional entries and using the augmented information. The results o f their comparison are due to be published soon.— M ary Devlin, Chair­ person, O regon A C R L C hapter. ■■ Resources in Education Worksheet Available A “ W orksheet on How to Use Resources in E d u c a tio n ” has b e e n p r e p a r e d by the A C R L /EBSS Com m ittee on Bibliographic In­ struction for Educators. It has been approved by the full com m ittee and by all o f the m em ­ bers o f the EBSS E x ecu tiv e Board. Single copies are available from the A C R L Office.