Copyright regulations and libraries: The CASE Act and how to make your voice heard
- Shared screen with speaker view

19:25
Yes, we will record! Just started

32:21
Belated greetings from lovely Vallejo, CA!

37:15
Does the exemption of Federal or State government entities extend necessarily to public state university and college libraries?

37:57
What about Land Grant institutions?

37:59
Often yes to the institution but not necessarily to the individual employees as Dave will tell us more about in a minute.

38:26
I was wondering the same -- are state-funded libraries exempt automatically, or would they need to pre-emptively opt-out?

41:44
https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/case-act-implementation/library-opt-out/

45:25
Note: regulations.gov now allows comments to summit as "anonymous".

52:35
CC-BY for the win!

53:00
Re-iterating this comment from earlier in the chat:

53:21
Does the exemption of Federal or State government entities extend necessarily to public state university and college libraries? Is there extra “opting out” that needs to occur in this situation?

53:22
As part of a large state consortia … it doesn’t appear the consortia would be able to opt out on behalf of all the libraries within it, right?

53:42
Can you share context for what the "opt out" means if it only applies to institutions and not employees?

54:40
Is the opt-out provision part of the Act or is that a regulatory proposal? Why not an opt-in for libraries?

54:42
The text of the proposed rulemaking makes it sound like Copyright Office has already gone through a good deal of opinions and has sort of already made up their minds about things, including treating library employees as individuals who can be named as respondents. Are they likely to change their minds about anything they specifically address in that document?

55:31
Thank you!

55:56
ASERL could not opt-out on behalf of our members

56:07
(And that goes back to state entity, too ...)

56:14
Q: What is the definition of publicly accessible libraries? For instance, does interlibrary loan count in terms of access? Or are they talking about physical access?

56:16
Do you suggest we use the Office's language in the notice (E.g. “Moreover, the CASE Act expressly offers the preemptive opt-out option to “a library or archives,” but does not mention employees.”) as a means of developing a counter argument?

56:35
I apologize for the naivete of this question, but I'm wondering your thoughts on the risks associated with opting out. For example, will CASE encourage additional lawsuits, even if it means it is the most costly ones, with libraries potentially facing larger costs due to opting out?

59:11
Everyone loves a citation (even their own work)! Thanks!

01:01:41
*ESPECIALLY* to their own work, Kyle. :)

01:01:54
At least in a federal court there would be a well tread process, rules of evidence, defenses available!

01:02:10
Most Scholarly Communications Librarian are, by default, also the Copyright Librarian. Would you suggest posting this information to a ListServ?

01:02:26
I would like to hear an answer to Alyssa's point. Thanks.

01:02:47
+1 Alyssa

01:03:37
Has there been any discussion about how the CO will handle trolls/abuse of the system? I’ve read that there is a lot of concern about folks filing frivolous suits in order to get default settlements.

01:03:39
+1 for MORE letters from us

01:04:25
Like Dave, I'm wondering about copyright trolls / frivolous lawsuits.

01:04:29
how will the slides and recording be shared?

01:04:30
I agree with Susanna's point. More response means our concerns are recorded.

01:04:47
As far as minds made up, the House and Senate Judiciary Committees did NOT include the blanket opt-out for libraries in the CASE Act in the versions they passed. And there was no Congressional record established about the blanket opt-out initially. So this is all new! Comments matter!

01:04:59
Just realized y’all were staring at a mostly not important slide :)

01:06:31
Yes we will share the recording and slides

01:07:01
Re trolls the act includes "The Register of Copyrights may establish regulations relating to the permitted number of proceedings each year by the same claimant under this chapter, in the interests of justice and the administration of the Copyright Claims Board."

01:07:20
@Laura, thank you!

01:07:27
So hopefully there will be regulations limiting potential activity...

01:07:39
See 7 Patry on Copyright § 28:11 "CASE Act will be a copyright troll assembly line"

01:08:00
Sigh, Kyle

01:09:17
We plan to contact our student legal services office to give them a heads up about this (Univ of Nebraska-Lincoln)

01:09:47
Ooh, that’s a great idea Sue!

01:09:54
Thanks, all. Very worthwhile.

01:10:07
Thank you~

01:10:07
Ty, all!

01:10:07
THANKS LCI folks!! Awesome

01:10:08
Thanks to panel for a great presentation and discussion!

01:10:09
Thanks for the updates!!

01:10:11
Yes, thanks for the opportunity to learn more about this.

01:10:12
Thanks so much for this - It was very under my radar

01:10:13
thanks. i learned alot.

01:10:14
Thank you!

01:10:15
Thank you.

01:10:15
Thank you!

01:10:16
Thanks!!

01:10:17
Thank you!

01:10:18
Thank you!

01:10:19
Thank you!

01:10:19
Thank you!

01:10:20
Thank you.

01:10:21
Thank you!

01:10:21
Thank you so much for this. Great session.

01:10:21
Thank you!

01:10:22
Thank you all so much!

01:10:22
Thanks!

01:10:22
Thank you.

01:10:25
Thank you for the information.

01:10:25
Thanks!

01:10:26
Thank you!

01:10:27
Thank you for the update.

01:10:30
thanks!

01:10:31
Thank yoU!

01:10:31
Thank you!

01:10:31
Very informative - thanks!

01:10:32
Thank you all for the informative presentation!

01:10:32
Thanks!

01:10:32
thanks

01:10:32
Thank upi!