Items of some interest:

These are my recent Pin​board​.in links:

  • Serv­ing a pub­lic that knows how to copy: orphan works and mass dig­i­ti­za­tion « PWxyz

    “For exam­ples of mate­ri­als with high merit and dif­fi­cult rights sta­tus, Bruce Hart­ford of the Amer­i­can Civil Rights Move­ment web­site high­lighted the sheer impos­si­bil­ity of deter­min­ing right­sh­old­ers for many archival mate­ri­als: inter­nal doc­u­ments cre­ated by Stu­dent Non­vi­o­lent Coor­di­nat­ing Com­mit­tee (SNCC) in the 1960s are orphans because SNCC no longer exists. A pho­to­graph taken by an unknown pris­oner in a South­ern jail of another pris­oner is an orphan because the copy­right is held by the unknown pris­oner who took the orig­i­nal pho­to­graph. In a sim­i­lar vein, Rick Prelinger aired a color video, pos­si­bly shot by an employee of the War Relo­ca­tion Author­ity, of the 1944 release of Japanese-​​Americans interned at the Jerome War Relo­ca­tion Cen­ter in Arkansas. This is a cru­cial point that is rarely noted: orphan sta­tus may be most com­mon for mate­ri­als gen­er­ated on the mar­gins of soci­ety — by peo­ple whose names and pres­ence were never recorded, some­times because of per­se­cu­tion; or by infor­mal or tran­sient orga­ni­za­tions, groups, and move­ments that never had an oppor­tu­nity to cre­ate their own legacy. For this con­tent — which includes some of the most impor­tant arti­facts that a soci­ety is likely to pro­duce, doc­u­ment­ing both its strug­gles and those who speak with­out a recorded voice — for­mal inter­ven­tions are unlikely to make a mean­ing­ful dif­fer­ence because there is so lit­tle own­er­ship data to work with. In these cases, Fair Use is often the appro­pri­ate apparatus.”

    copy­right intellectual-​​property orphaned-​​works dig­i­ti­za­tion law