Open Letter from the GSA on Access Copyright

Stuart Ryan stuart_ryan at carleton.ca
Tue May 15 14:09:49 EDT 2012

--_000_0E8C8657916C7142BA0DB09CA2319A6466FB05BD3FCCSMBX10CUNET_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi, everyone

CUPE 4600 has been asked to distribute an Open Letter from the Graduate Stu= dents Association concerning the issue of Carleton University and Access Co= pyright:

http://gsacarleton.ca/section/366

Open letter on Access Copyright To the Carleton University Community,

Carleton University is considering the imposition of an unreasonable copyri= ght scheme that would result in a substantial fee to be paid by students. T= he issue of copyright and access to scholarly communications in Canada has = been a widely discussed and debated subject over the last year. In an age o= f technological advancements and evolving attitudes towards public access t= o knowledge creation, the copyright licensing organisation Access Copyright=

has sought to gain funds from public colleges and universities through inf= lated costs and bullying tactics.

Recently, the Association of Universities and Colleges Canada (AUCC) droppe= d their objector status at the Copyright Board of Canada against Access Cop= yright's proposed licensing increase from $3.38 to $45.00 per student. Foll= owing its change of heart, the AUCC signed a Model License with Access Copy= right. This new model is now before Canadian colleges and universities and = if adopted would implement a $26.00 per student fee, along with other dubio= us financial and legal obligations.

Access Copyright is a licensing agency that has rights to and administers c= opyright licenses for an unknown repertoire of copyrighted works. It sells = licenses to post-secondary institutions as a form of 'advance permission to=

reproduce'. In 2010, Access Copyright proposed a new tariff and licensing = regime to the Copyright Board of Canada. This new scheme proposed to increa= se the per student cost from $3.38 to $45.00 for universities and $35.00 fo= r other educational institutions. No justification for this increase has ev= er been provided. Given the increasing use of open access content, material=

publicly available over the internet, and direct licensing arrangements be= tween universities and publishers it would seem reasonable to expect the ta= riff to decrease.

As of January 1, 2011 Carleton University chose to no longer be licensed wi= th Access Copyright. The Academic Research Committee of Carleton University=

approved a Fair Dealing Policy in December 2010, which was subsequently am= ended in January 2011. This policy is modelled on guidelines developed by t= he Association of Universities and Colleges Canada (AUCC). Carleton Univers= ity demonstrated leadership by choosing not to renew with Access Copyright = and, in coordination with its Library staff, has done an excellent job of m= aintaining student and faculty access to copyrighted works and ensuring com= pliance with copyright laws.

Although Access Copyright has dropped the fee from $45.00 to $26.00, it rem= ains unreasonable and exploitative. Furthermore, the proposed Model License=

that educational intuitions such as Carleton University are being asked to=

sign contains highly questionable clauses that are both regressive and ove= rreaching. Such clauses include:

* Prohibiting students and researchers from storing and cataloguing jour= nal articles, effectively making a person with a library of research materi= als in violation of the license model.

* Payment for rights already granted under copyright legislation - such = as copying or pasting hyperlinks, something which contradicts a recent Supr= eme Court of Canada ruling.

* Prohibiting the storage of materials on networks other than those oper= ated and controlled by the university. For example, USB drives, Dropbox, an= d email. Clearly, clauses such as these within the Model License arrangement are tro= ubling, particularly when coupled with the minimum $26.00 per student fee. = To make matters worse, Access Copyright has imposed a signing deadline of M= ay 15, 2012. If educational institutions do not wish to face a dramatic inc= rease in retroactive payments and/or threats of legal actions and invasive = surveillance tactics they must sign by this deadline.

We would like to make it clear that it is not necessary to sign on to Acces= s Copyright and AUCC's Model License. The actions of Access Copyright would=

seem to amount to little more than a form of extortion. This is evident gi= ven the fact that existing rights are being rescinded and that payment of t= hese inflated fees serves only as protection from the company purporting to=

provide it.

Alternatives to Access Copyright's demands do exist, one of which Carleton = and other universities have already managed to successfully implement and m= aintain. We strongly urge the Carleton community to speak out against the p= ossibility of Carleton's engagement with Access Copyright and AUCC's Model = License arrangement.

The Carleton Graduate Students' Association and others in the student body = are firmly against having the $26.00 fee and its associated conditions impo= sed upon us. It is of particular importance that the Carleton community rej= ect this unreasonable scheme, especially at a time when Canadians are immer= sed in a discourse surrounding public education and the rights of citizens = to access and share in knowledge creation.

Sincerely,

Kelly Black President Graduate Students' Association

More information on copyright is widely available:

Canadian Federation of Students www.cfs-fcee.ca/html/english/campaigns/copyright.php

Canadian Association of University Teachers www.caut.ca/uploads/2009_CopyrightConsultation.pdf www.caut.ca/news_details.asp?nid=3D1757&page=3D490

Ariel Katz - "The Best Possible Outcome for Universities, Really?" http://arielkatz.org/archives/1673

Canadian Association of Research Libraries http://carl-abrc.ca/en/public-policy/Copyright.html

--_000_0E8C8657916C7142BA0DB09CA2319A6466FB05BD3FCCSMBX10CUNET_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi, everyone

 

CUPE = 4600 has been asked to distribute an Open Letter from the Graduate Students=

Association concerning the issue of Carleton University and Access Copyrig= ht:

 = ;

http://gsacarleton.ca/section/366

 

Open letter on Access Copyright

To the Carleton University Community,

 

Carleton University is consideri= ng the imposition of an unreasonable copyright scheme that would result in = a substantial fee to be paid by students. The issue of copyright and access=

to scholarly communications in Canada has been a widely discussed and deba= ted subject over the last year. In an age of technological advancements and=

evolving attitudes towards public access to knowledge creation, the copyri= ght licensing organisation Access Copyright has sought to gain funds from p= ublic colleges and universities through inflated costs and bullying tactics= . 

 

Recently, the Association of Universities and Colleges Canada (AU= CC) dropped their objector status at the Copyright Board of Canada against = Access Copyright’s proposed licensing increase from $3.38 to $45.00 p= er student. Following its change of heart, the AUCC signed a Model License = with Access Copyright. This new model is now before Canadian colleges and u= niversities and if adopted would implement a $26.00 per student fee, along = with other dubious financial and legal obligations.

 

Access Copyright is = a licensing agency that has rights to and administers copyright licenses fo= r an unknown repertoire of copyrighted works. It sells licenses to post-sec= ondary institutions as a form of ‘advance permission to reproduceR= 17;. In 2010, Access Copyright proposed a new tariff and licensing regime t= o the Copyright Board of Canada. This new scheme proposed to increase the p= er student cost from $3.38 to $45.00 for universities and $35.00 for other = educational institutions. No justification for this increase has ever been = provided. Given the increasing use of open access content, material publicl= y available over the internet, and direct licensing arrangements between un= iversities and publishers it would seem reasonable to expect the tariff to = decrease. 

 

As of January 1, 2011 Carleton University chose to no lon= ger be licensed with Access Copyright. The Academic Research Committee of C= arleton University approved a Fair Dealing Policy in December 2010, which w= as subsequently amended in January 2011. This policy is modelled on guideli= nes developed by the Association of Universities and Colleges Canada (AUCC)= . Carleton University demonstrated leadership by choosing not to renew with=

Access Copyright and, in coordination with its Library staff, has done an = excellent job of maintaining student and faculty access to copyrighted work= s and ensuring compliance with copyright laws. 

 

Although Access Copy= right has dropped the fee from $45.00 to $26.00, it remains unreasonable an= d exploitative. Furthermore, the proposed Model License that educational in= tuitions such as Carleton University are being asked to sign contains highl= y questionable clauses that are both regressive and overreaching. Such clau= ses include:

 

=

--_000_0E8C8657916C7142BA0DB09CA2319A6466FB05BD3FCCSMBX10CUNET_--

More information about the Cupe4600-bargaining mailing list