2 ms·
I assume you intended to link to 108 (Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries and archives) rather than 107 (Limitations on exclusive rights:
by eindiran 6y ago
I assume you intended to link to 108 (Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries and archives) rather than 107 (Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use): https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#108 https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#108
In any case, profit is a specific limitation on what libraries and archives can do:
108(h)(2) -- No reproduction, distribution, display, or performance is authorized under this subsection if—
(A) the work is subject to normal commercial exploitation;
(B) a copy or phonorecord of the work can be obtained at a reasonable price; or
(C) the copyright owner or its agent provides notice pursuant to regulations promulgated by the Register of Copyrights that either of the conditions set forth in subparagraphs (A) and (B) applies.
- salawat 6y agoI would say B is debatable in all cases considering you'd have to factor in the costs of ebook medium, and the fact that there is a real argument that agreeing to publisher's licensing/DRM scheme can be trivially argued to be an unreasonable price. Throw in the constraints arising from social distancing strongly disfavoring physical purchasing, and it sounds to me like the industry is simply refusing to adapt to the times. If people will not purchase your book at the price you set it at, I'd argue that it isn't a reasonable price. Further, if you invest large amounts of capital into technological infrastructure to thwart free dissemination of digital content, and people decide not to aid you by recouping your investment through purchases, I'd consider that the Invisible Hand at work. The publishing industry is less a disseminate anymore, but more an IP speculator. I file them with patent trolls at this point.