
White House Considers Joining Publishers To Stamp Out Fair Use At Universities - sethbannon
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130131/00310621834/obama-administration-considers-joining-publishers-fight-to-stamp-out-fair-use-universities.shtml
======
btilly
I am puzzled that stories like this surprise people.

Ever since Obama picked Joe Biden as his VP, it was clear what his
administration's default stance on copyright issues would be. If you wonder
why I say that, <https://www.google.com/search?q=joe+biden+copyright> provides
lots of starting places to learn more.

Am I the only one around here who actually researches the candidates that I'm
presented with to see what they think about issues that I care about? I
thought (and still do) that Obama was the lesser of 2 evils both times. But
I'm well aware that I do not agree with this administration on a number of
issues, and copyright is one of them.

~~~
spikels
Don't imagine there is or ever was any difference in the positions of
Democrats and Republicans on copyright issues. The Copyright Act of 1976
passed 97-0 in the Senate and 316-7 in the House. More recent major copyright
legislation, the DMCA and CTEA, passed without even recording individual votes
(voice vote or unanomous consent).

The US copyright law has been dictated by the media industry for a long time
in something akin to regulatory capture[1]. Their lobbyists and lawyers
literally write the law[2]. A revolving door sees former senators heading to
cushy jobs at the MPAA pass RIAA litigators headed to the Copyright Office.

This is why the failure of SOPA was so shocking to the political and media
establishment. Instead of the general public being fleeced for a few extra
dollars every time they bought a movie or album, large businesses like Google
had billions of dollars at stake and they wanted their interests to be taken
into account.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture>

[2]
[http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/google...](http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/googles-
ceo-the-laws-are-written-by-lobbyists/63908/)

~~~
btilly
I don't imagine that there is a difference. Both sides vote for horrible
copyright legislation. Both try to keep the horribleness secret from everyone
except the lobbyists until the last moment. Both are happy to use secret
international treaty negotiations as a way to keep those secrets. There is no
difference, which is why it was big news that some on the Republican side
considered doing otherwise.

My point was that this is obvious to anyone who does a little research.
Therefore seeing the government serving copyright-holders' interests is no
surprise.

~~~
spikels
Completely agree. Although he has lots and lots of company, Biden really is
one of the worst on many issues of interest, for example privacy[1]. And it's
ironic that he often presents copyright as a moral issue, equating copyright
violations with theft, when he was caught copying 5 pages out of a law review
article in 15 page paper he submitted in law school[2] and then there is the
plagiarism in some of his speeches[3].

[1] [http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/joe-biden-private-
em...](http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/12/joe-biden-private-email/)

[2] [http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/18/us/biden-admits-
plagiarism...](http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/18/us/biden-admits-plagiarism-
in-school-but-says-it-was-not-malevolent.html)

[3]
[http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_less...](http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2008/08/the_write_stuff.single.html)

~~~
btilly
Yes, they are all the same. Except that some are much more the same than
others.

There would have been few you could pick that would have made me less happy
than Biden. Unfortunately two on that short list are Sarah Palin and Paul
Ryan.

------
tzs
Hmmmm...hint of conspiracy theory; xenophobia; out of context quotes from law;
no idea how fair use actually works; extreme hyperbole; general cluelessness.

In other words, a typical Mike Masnick piece. I do not understand why anyone
takes Techdirt seriously.

~~~
homosaur
Yeah, I CANNOT IMAGINE why anyone would assume anything ill of the revolving
door between business and government, what a bunch of conspiracists. You also
might want to learn what the word "xenophobia" means since at no point in this
article does it discuss foreign actors or organizations.

~~~
tzs
> You also might want to learn what the word "xenophobia" means since at no
> point in this article does it discuss foreign actors or organizations

"Two out of the three publishers are foreign publishing giants"

"funding some foreign publishers"

"supporting foreign publishers"

~~~
homosaur
Yeah but it has nothing to do with the fact that they are specifically foreign
but pointing out yet another point of ridiculousness with the administration's
position on this matter given this is 2/3rds foreign agents vs American
colleges. Xenophobia is just a ridiculous accusation by OP to personally
attack the author of this article.

------
danso
> _The very first Copyright Act in the US was actually titled "An Act for the
> Encouragement of Learning." Current copyright law is explicit that fair use
> covers this sort of situation:_

(the OP links to here:) <http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107>

> _Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a
> copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or
> phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes
> such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple
> copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement
> of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any
> particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—_

It appears to me that the OP is misreading the law. From what I can tell, the
law says that _if_ a copy/reproduction of a work is _fair use_...including for
classroom purposes...then it is not an infringement of copyright.

The OP interprets this as: "If something is reproduced for classroom use, then
it is fair use"

That is not at all correct. Check out this primer about fair use and
education:
[http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/...](http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter7/7-b.html)

The short summary of it is: You can't just copy whatever you want for purposes
of teaching and assume that it is "fair use".

Maybe someone more well-versed in the law can correct me, but from what I can
tell (I've had some education in this, but not a formal law degree), the OP is
quite a bit wrong in his assumptions.

~~~
Natsu
Those appear to be Stanford's own guidelines on the subject. As far as I know,
there are no actual hard and fast rules and one has to decide on a case-by-
case basis after applying the four factor test. That part of the statute seems
to be there because legislators believed that making a bunch of copies of
something for classroom use was likely to be fair use and there was enough
concern over protecting that use case to mention it explicitly.

Incidentally, there are many sets of guidelines like the one you cite. Here
are a couple others:

<http://www.adec.edu/admin/papers/fair10-17.html>

[http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=copyrightarticle&...](http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=copyrightarticle&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=26700)

~~~
danso
There are no "hard and fast rules" on fair use, just as there are no "hard and
fast rules" about what makes slander, slander. Or what makes police brutality,
brutal (in an illegal sense). But yet both are still against the law.

I'm not saying that it's easy to define fair use. I'm saying the OP seems to
have a dishonest reading of the law if he's trying to assert that "fair use"
means academia can reproduce copyrighted work and consider it "fair" because
it's for educational purposes. That is completely missing the entire concept
of "fair use".

~~~
Natsu
The fact is that a teacher making a bunch of copies of something as hand-outs
for their class is so common and benign a use case as to be mentioned in the
statute, just to ensure that it could not be precluded by factor #3.
Educational use itself is part of factor #1.

In any scenario where a teacher was copying educational materials for a class,
I would have a hard time seeing it as anything but fair use barring unusual
circumstances. Which was, I think, the point they were trying to make.

------
csense
If Democrats are in favor of expanding rights for copyright holders, why did
the Republicans a few months ago back away so far and so fast from their
policy memo exploring opposition, to the level of firing the person who wrote
it (never mind that it appears that it went through the correct channels to be
published with the party's name on it)?

What copyright reform needs is someone with deep enough pockets to be able to
b̶r̶i̶b̶e̶ lobby politicians effectively. Or perhaps a general public that
understands and cares about the issue...

~~~
mindslight
Because they're all part of the same organization?

What copyright reform needs is better software and a healthy mocking of those
who think supporting a cartel is hip when it involves iToys.

------
GiraffeNecktie
Damnit, Aaron, we still need you.

~~~
spoiledtechie
You can start the effort your self. Stop relying on others to do what you feel
passionately about.

------
richardjordan
I get that there are decisions in elections, and I get that on the issues YOU
care about YOUR party is infinitely better than THEIR party, but when both
parties just do the bidding of anti-democratic big business elites it just
seems impossible to ever make things better, and the accumulation of these
seemingly small steps continues. Stories like this ruin my day, not in
isolation, but precisely because of the pattern of behavior in our body
politic that they reprsent.

------
SeanDav
America has some of the finest laws that money can buy.

Right there is the issue and America is going to continue to get ridiculous
laws while the lobby system exists.

------
aspensmonster
Well... think about it. If a professor was allowed to post the textbook --or
even just pieces of it, say, the homework problems or example problems-- what
use then would a student have for the textbook? Nobody would buy Fundamentals
of Chemistry 50th Edition!

Clearly such actions are not fair use.

------
homosaur
I honestly just assume at this point if there's a way for the Obama
administration to dick over the public in favor of their corporate masters,
they're going to jump on it. This has become typical and expected behavior
from this hypocritical "transparency"-baiting group.

------
Tycho
America seems to produce the best media content in the world (at least in
terms of demand), and the best academic content (at least in terms of
citations). Does that indicate that the legal system etc. surrounding media
and copyright is probably pretty good?

------
mark-r
This ties in perfectly with another link presented on HN today:
[http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/01/power_and_the_...](http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/01/power_and_the_i.html)

------
kzahel
This is outrageous.

