No.3-81 May - Adm.monash.edu.au - Monash University

Photocopying: changes coming Photocopying over the last decade or 80 hascome to play an increasingly .Ignlficant role onthe education scene with photocopied materialbeing uaed widely for private .tudy and In thecla8sroom.Needless to say it is a phenomenon that has notescaped the attention of authors, publisherS andother owners of copyright.In 1976 the Franki Committee - known officiallyas the Copyright Law Committee on ReprographicReproduction - inquired into and maderecommendations on the photocopying of copyrigbtworks, The Committee's recommendations havebeen generally implemented in the CopyrightAmendment Act 1980.When certain provisions of this Act come intooperation later this year - after users have had timeto study how the new system will work - the face of'photocopying in educational institutions is set tochange.A new book by Mr James Lahore. formerly a. Reader in Law at Monash, provides basic practicalinformation on the new photocopying proceduresrequired by the Act for people who will have toobserve them - librarians, teachers, students,lawyers and othOl persons who need ready access toinformation and the efficient dissemination of thatinformation for the use of others,The book is Photocopying: A GuIde to the 1980Amendment. to the Copyright Act, published byButterwortlJ8. Mr Lahore late last year wasappointed the first Herchel Smith Professor of IntellectualProperty Law at Queen Mary College in theUniversity of London.Mr Lahore describes as the "cornerstone" of thenew amendments provisions which relate tomultiple copying of works under statutory licence byeducation!,1 institutions. This provision is designedto permit the multiple copying of the whole or partr.f articles and other works by educationalinstitutions for teaching purposes, subject to certainlimitations, provided that an equitableremuneration is paid to the copyright owner.It calls for new administrative procedures ineducational institutions related to the compilationof detailed records in ca ... where multiple copying isdone for teaching purposes. These records must beheld and made available for inspection during aprescribed period.If requested, an equitable remuneration must bepaid to the copyright owner of works copied. Thissum is either agreed upon by the owner and theeducational institution or determined by theCopyright Tribunal.Planning by institutions to meet the demand. ofthe new legislation at this stage can only be limitedbecause certain regulations associated with it havenot yet been made.At Monash, however, the Library is currentlyMIrt.,.,• •Physics mVltes labs use• "Photocopying: A Guide to the 1980Amendments to the Copyright Act" has arecommended retail price of $4.95.conducting for the Vice-Chancellor a survey to es·tablish the extent of multiple copying for teachingpurposes in the University.The University Librarian, Mr Brian Southwell.says that it is anticipated that the photocopyingprovisions of the Act will come into force in thesecond half of this year by which time procedures forcomplying with them should be generally known.Action to meet the requirements of the Act will beof utmost importance for educational institutions.Under it, failure to comply with the administrativeprocedures related to multiple copying is a criminaloffence punishable, upon conviction, in some casesby a fine up to $500.Failure by libraries and archives to keep recordson copying for other specified purposes - evenwhere no remuneration is due to the copyright owner- can carry a penalty of up to $500 also.Fines 'worst feeture'Mr Lahore describes thi. a8 one of the worstfeatures of the legislation."One can understand why a criminal sanction isconsidered to be a more effective way of enforcingcompliance with the procedures of the Act ratherthan the threat of possible copyright infringementproceedings at some future time/' he says."However, the imposition of criminal liability onbodies administering institutions and on employeesof those institutions to secure proper record keepingplaces a heavy and unjustifiable burden on those institutions,"Mr Lahore has other sharp criticisms of the Act:"It is prolix, complex, and difficult to understand.."The Act is intended to provide a system ofphotocopying for users generally, for libraries, forschools, universities and other educationalinstitutions and for handicapped'readers, and at thesame time to give a fair payment to the copyrightowner."The system must be easily manageable and 'clearly understood by the many people employed inthese institutions who will have to use it and bythose who want to receive payment for what iscopied."Unfortunately the Act requires many confusingprocedures. It is doubtful whether any person couldunderstand how the system works other than by along and detailed study of the 1980 Act."Mr Lahore says that one of the reasons for thecomplexity of the legislation is the basic principleadopted by it. That is payment according to use ofcopyright materials - thus neceositating detailedrecord keeping and inspection procedures - ratherthan, say, payment by means of a blanket licensingscheme."Whether an alternative system will have to be usedcan only be answered after experience of the systemnow adopted. It will be an interesting exercise, ncomments Mr Lahore.Mr Lahore points out that while newarrangement. are necetllary for multiple copyingfor teaching purp