ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries


M a y  1984 /  237

equally highly. In fact the most common response 
on evaluations applauded the high quality of the 
presentations and commented that the information 
presented was new and professionally stimulating.

The project as a whole was equally successful. 
Several state associations that did not win grants 
decided to pay for an entire workshop themselves, 
thus further extending the service to the m em ber­
ship and im pact of the grant. The grants paid 
24 % -84 % of the total expenses of each workshop

and an average of 55% of the expenses of all the 
workshops. The clearest expression of the value of 
this project comes from the final report of the New 
Mexico Library Association: “An ambitious under­
taking. . .involving such high speaker costs.. .would 
not have been attem pted w ithout ALA financial 
assistance.... We hope that the Bibliographic In ­
struction Section will find justification in the evalu­
ation reports from all the grant recipients to enable 
this grant program to be repeated.” ■ ■

Copyright: An ACRL resolution

Prepared by the ACRL Copyright Committee 
Barbara Rystrom, Chair

The guidelines referred to in the NYU settlement are too 
restrictive.

I n  June 1983 the Association of American Pub- 

lishers (AAP) sent a letter to college and university 
administrators urging them to adopt as their copy­
right compliance policy the agreement which New 
York University (NYU) accepted as p art of the May 
9, 1983, out-of-court settlement of the copyright 
infringement lawsuit brought against it by a group 
of publishers and coordinated by the AAP.1 Out-of- 
court settlements in lawsuits are not imposed by the 
courts and do not set legal precedents; therefore, 
such settlements are not necessarily appropriate 
models for entities not a party to the settlement.

The NYU policy states th at faculty can expect 
the University to defend and indemnify them in the 
event of a claim of copyright infringement only if 
the faculty member has followed the guidelines in­
corporated in the policy, gotten permission from

1 Chronicle o f Higher Education, April 20, 1983, 
pp.1, 22.

the copyright owner, or cleared the copying with 
the General Counsel of the University. The guide­
lines incorporated in the policy are fam iliar to 
copyright observers, because they are from the 
Agreement on Guidelines for Classroom Copying 
in Not-for-Profit Educational Institutions with Re­
spect to Books and Periodicals (hereafter referred 
to as the Classroom Guidelines). Designed to clar­
ify the principle of fair use as it applies to copying 
for classroom instruction, and to provide “greater 
certainty and protection for teachers,” the Class­
room Guidelines were negotiated by prim ary and 
secondary school educators with authors and pub­
lishers, and were incorporated into the House Re­
port on the copyright la w .2 The American Associa-

2U.S. House of Representatives. Committee on 
the Judiciary. Report on Copyright Law  Revision, 
H.R. 94-1476, September 3, 1976, p p .68-70, with 
corrections in the Congressional Record, Septem­
ber 21, 1976, pp. H10727-28.



2 3 8  /  C & R L  N e w s

tion of University Professors and the Association of 
A m erican L aw  Schools w ere not p arties to th e 
agreem ent, w hich they felt was too restrictive in 
the college and university context. The Association 
of Research L ibraries has described the Classroom 
G uidelines as “unsuitable in the context of postse­
condary e d u catio n ,” and the Am erican L ib rary  As­
sociation has stated th a t the Classroom Guidelines 
“norm ally w ould not be realistic in the University 
settin g .”3

T hough the Classroom G uidelines clearly state 
the purpose is “to state the m inim um  and not the 
m axim um  standards of educational fair use,” expe­
rience shows th a t such guidelines are often referred 
to as if they provided outer limits; for exam ple, the 
NYU policy says th a t permission is required for 
copying “ not p e rm itte d  u n d er th e (Classroom) 
G uidelines.” And those Guidelines are tru ly  lim it­
ing. Among other details, the C um ulative Effect 
section indicates th a t a given item can be copied 
“for only one course in the school in w hich the cop­
ies are m a d e ,” and th a t “not m ore th a n  one short 
poem , article, story, essay or tw o excerpts m ay be 
copied from the sam e au th o r, nor m ore th a n  three 
from the same collective work or periodical volum e 
d u rin g  one class te rm .” T he Brevity section limits 
copying of poetry to “a com plete poem if less th a n  
250 w ords” or “from a longer poem , an excerpt of 
not m ore th a n  250 w o rd s,” and copying of prose to 
less th a n  2,500 words. It is clear th a t these stip u la­
tions are unw orkable in a postsecondary setting.

T he A C R L C o p y rig h t C o m m ittee shares th e 
opinion th a t the Classroom Guidelines are not a p ­
p ropriate for colleges and universities and th a t, 
th erefo re, th e NYU policy, w hich incorporates 
th e m , is not an a p p r o p r ia te  m odel. T h e ALA 
Model Policy C oncerning College and University 
P hotocopying for C lassroom , Research an d  L i­
b rary  Reserve Use, reprinted in C & R L  N ew s, April 
1982, pp. 127-31, offers a m uch m ore pertin en t in ­
te rp retatio n  of fair use. In addition, several institu ­
tions have devised copyright com pliance policies 
w hich are a p p ro p riate for colleges and universities. 
T h erefo re, at its M id w in te r 1984 m eetings, th e 
C o m m itte e  d r a f te d  th e  fo llo w in g  re s o lu tio n , 
w hich was adopted by the ACRL Board at its m eet­
ing at the end of the conference.

T he ACRL C opyright C om m ittee w ould w el­
come com m ent on this and any other copyright re­
lated issue, and urges college and university lib ra ri­
ans to keep it inform ed about local developm ents 
an d  problem s in co p y rig h t at th e ir in stitutions. 
Please contact the chair at the University of G eor­
gia Libraries, Athens, GA 30602; (404) 542-3274.

’Association of Research L ibraries, “R eproduc­
tion of C opyrighted M aterials for Classroom Use: 
A Briefing P aper for T eaching F aculty and A dm in­
istrato rs,” July 1983, available from ARL; “Model 
Policy C oncerning College and University Photo­
copying for Classroom , Research and L ib rary  Re­
serve U se,” C & R L  N ew s, April 1982, pp. 127, 129.

The resolution
W hereas, the 1982 law suit settlem ent betw een 

New York University (NYU) and nine publishers 
calls for NYU to adopt cam pus w ide guidelines on 
photocopying instructional m aterials w hich d u p li­
cate alm ost v erb atim  th e copying sta n d a rd s set 
forth in the Agreem ent on Guidelines for Class­
room C opying in Not for Profit E ducational Insti­
tutions w ith Respect to Books and Periodicals;

W h e re a s, th e  A g re e m e n t on G u id e lin e s fo r 
Classroom C opying, developed by p rim ary  and 
secondary school educators and publishers, was 
criticized by the A m erican Association of U niver­
sity Professors an d  th e A m erican A ssociation of 
L aw  Schools as too restrictive for classroom ap p li­
cation at the university level;

W hereas, th e  A ssociation of A m eric an  P u b ­
lishers has openîy and aggressively encouraged the 
NYU guidelines be adopted by all colleges and u n i­
versities;

W hereas, the Am erican L ib rary  Association’s 
Model Policy C oncerning College an d  University 
P hotocopying for C lassroom , R esearch an d  L i­
b rary  Reserve Use, w hich is m ore ap p ro p riate to 
academ ic institutions and their libraries, offers a 
legitim ate and less restrictive in terp retatio n  of F air 
Use th a n  the NYU guidelines;

W h e re a s, o th e r a c a d e m ic  in s titu tio n s  h a v e  
a d o p te d  a c c e p ta b le  a n d  le g itim a te  c o p y rig h t 
guidelines other th a n  those resulting from the NYU 
settlem ent. Now, therefore be it resolved,

T h a t colleges and universities and th eir libraries 
should continue to in terp ret the C opyright Act in a 
m an n er th a t is in th e spirit of the law  and consistent 
w ith  the rights and needs of both copyright p ro p ri­
etors and the academ ic com m unity, and need not 
conform  to the guidelines as set forth in th e NYU 
settlem ent. ■ ■

Copyright bibliography

M ary Lee Sweat, university lib ra ria n  at Loy­
ola University, New O rleans, has com piled a 
bibliography of cu rren t (1982-present) articles 
on copyright for the ACRL C opyright C o m m it­
tee. T he articles are d ra w n  from th e results of 
an  o n lin e search  of fo u r d a tab ases: E R IC , 
LISA, Legal Resources Index, an d  th e M icro­
com puter Index.

Persons interested in copyright m ay obtain a 
copy of the 8-page bibliography by sending an 
SASE to M ary Lee Sw eat, University L ib ra r­
ian, Loyola University, 6363 St. C harles Street, 
New O rleans, LA 70118.

She w ould also appreciate receiving a copy of 
any institutional copyright policies or guide­
lines w hich your library employs.



A fortunate choice.

94 of the Fortune 100 com ­p a n i e s  c h o o s e  ABI/- INFORM® as th e ir b u si­
n e s s  d a ta b a s e . S im p ly  
b e c a u s e  A B I/IN FO R M  

helps them solve business and m anage­
ment problem s. Enhance strategic plan­
ning. Speak with authority. And this valu­
able inform ation reso u rce c o s ts  n o  
m o re to d a y  than it did in 1982. ABI/- 
INFORM sum m arizes the major articles 
in m ore than 600 business publications 
worldwide. And Data C ourier can p ro ­
vide you with the full text of most articles 
through an inexpensive article delivery 
service. It’s easy to see why the largest 
a n d  m o st s u c c e s s fu l c o r p o r a t i o n s  
choose ABI/INFORM. Fortunatelv, vour 
organization can make the same choice. 
Call 8 0 0 /6 2 6 -2 8 2 3  to find out more. 

Data Courier Inc