Tag: scholarly communication

In the ever-evolving landscape of digital access to scholarly research, libraries face new challenges as they navigate the intersection of copyright law and contractual agreements. Academic institutions increasingly rely on digital content, and understanding how copyright exceptions and contract law interact is crucial for protecting the rights of libraries and our users.

Tim Vollmer (Scholarly Communication & Copyright Librarian, UC Berkeley), Sara Benson (Copyright Librarian and Associate Professor, University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign), Jonathan Band (copyright attorney and counsel to the Library Copyright Alliance), and Jim Neal (University Librarian Emeritus, Columbia University) presented on these issues at the 2024 American Library Association Annual Conference in San Diego. Our panel was titled When Copyright and Contracts Collide: Advocacy for Library and User Rights.

The Role of Copyright Exceptions

Sara set the stage for our discussion by describing the importance of limitations and exceptions to copyright that empower libraries, research, and teaching. For example, Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act allows libraries and archives to make limited copies of copyrighted materials for preservation, replacement, fulfilling interlibrary loan requests, and more. Fair use—Section 107 of the Act—permits limited use of copyrighted works without having to seek the copyright holder’s permission when the use is for purposes such as teaching, research, scholarship, reporting, criticism, or parody. Faculty, students, and academic authors leverage fair use when they incorporate copyrighted materials for teaching, research, and publishing. And the fair use exception has played an increasingly important role in facilitating new types of scholarly research, including text and data mining.

The Threat of Contractual Override

Despite these protections, contractual agreements can sometimes override copyright exceptions. Vendor licensing terms may include clauses that restrict activities such as text and data mining. And even though fair use is a statutory right (meaning it’s in the law) in the U.S., and even though there have been court cases that confirm that activities such as text data mining falls under fair use, there is no protection against the practice where private parties such as academic publishers “contract around” fair use for actions that already are lawful.

As a result, academic libraries are forced to negotiate and often pay significant sums each year to try to preserve fair use rights for campus scholars through the database and electronic content license agreements that they sign.

Jonathan discussed alternative international approaches to the problem of contractual override. The European Union, for example, has implemented directives that nullify contract terms which override specific copyright exceptions. Countries like Australia, New Zealand, and Norway have also adopted similar measures. However, the United States and Canada lack comprehensive contract override prevention laws, making it challenging to protect copyright exceptions at the national level.

Advocating for Fair Contracts in Library Licensing

Tim discussed how academic libraries are demanding license agreements that preserve fair use rights. But at the same time, libraries are already starting to see contract amendments put forth by scholarly publishers that attempt to impose outright bans on any use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools for the content we’re licensing from them. The challenge is that we know that researchers are using library-licensed materials for many AI uses in the context of nonprofit scholarship and research, and these uses should be a fair use, just as it’s fair use for researchers to conduct text data mining on licensed resources.

Library workers can smartly negotiate to protect the rights of instructors, students, and other academic community members to use library-licensed resources in the ways they need to conduct their teaching and research while simultaneously taking into consideration the concerns of publishers.

Moving Forward: A Coordinated Approach

To address the issue of contractual override, Jim suggested several approaches, including educating library stakeholders such as administrators and faculty, building constructive relationships with publishers, monitoring international developments, and pursuing legislative change to protect copyright exceptions.

The University of California Libraries are already collaborating on this and related issues with our colleagues. After outreach to several library and faculty committees, the UC’s Academic Senate sent a letter to UC President Michael Drake to advocate that the UC Libraries need to be able to negotiate to preserve fair use rights when licensing electronic resources—including the rights to conduct computational research and utilize AI tools in academic studies and scholarship. President Drake and UC System Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs Katherine S. Newman affirmed this commitment.

Please reach out to schol-comm@berkeley.edu with any questions. For more information, please see the links below.

• Association of Research Libraries: Copyright and Contracts: Issues & Strategies
• Jonathan Band: Protecting User Rights Against Contract Override
• Rachael G. Samberg, Samantha Teremi, Timothy Vollmer: Fair use rights to conduct text and data mining and use artificial intelligence tools are essential for UC research and teaching
• UCNet: President Drake and Provost Newman affirm the university’s commitment to protect author, researcher and reader rights