Library Philosophy and Practice 2011
Copyright Across the Cohort: A Qualitative Evaluation of the Dissemination of Intellectual Property Information on ARL Websites
In December 2009 the Libraries Copyright Task Force (LCTF) of Colorado State University Libraries (CSUL) presented its findings to the CSUL interim dean and assistant deans. As part of its charge the LCTF was asked to "identify …current practice in responding to questions and issues regarding copyright in the Libraries" as well as "determine what the Libraries purview is in regard to copyright vs. other units in the University community…and any external role [the] Libraries can/should play". The LCTF was also asked, as its charge, to "define content for a Libraries web site and possibly produce the content" (Negrucci, et al., 2009,[pp.1-5]). This task force was the most recent of three internal committees that had examined copyright issues germane to the library and university community over the course of the past five years, as the transition from print to digital materials, the expansion of document delivery services, and the increase of local digitization initiatives prompted CSUL staff to address intellectual property issues with ever-increasing scrutiny.
Among its findings, the LCTF noted that there were many players in the university's copyright universe, each with different administrative and policy functions. At the time of the LCTF report, these players included campus units and departments as diverse as: The Institute for Learning and Teaching (TILT), Communications and Creative Services (CCS), Academic Computing and Networking Services (ACNS), the campus University Bookstore (CUB) the Colorado State University Research Foundation (CSURF), and the Office of General Counsel (OGC). While overlapping concerns necessitated some contact between these units regarding copyright issues, oftentimes, the units "functioned independently from the others, without much knowledge of copyright issues in other areas of campus" (Negrucci, et al., 2009,[pp.4-5]). To somewhat remedy this situation, as well as to facilitate communication during the year of its charge, the chair of the LCTF arranged for meetings to be held between LCTF members and the members of several of these aforementioned units.
The information exchanged between campus units during these meetings proved informative when the LCTF began to work towards its goal of creating a comprehensive web-based subject guide on copyright ("LibGuide") that could be accessed by the campus community. Noting that much of the campus community's information on copyright was on the web, but that there was no central clearinghouse for copyright information, the LCTF sought to gather information on copyright from other units and provide links to other campus web pages. Through the creation of the copyright subject guide, the LCTF was able to better reflect the copyright services of all campus units in one main place as well as begin to redefine its role in providing copyright information to campus constituencies beyond the walls of the library.
In addition to gathering input from other campus units while designing the CSUL copyright subject guide, the LCTF also looked beyond Colorado State University to review the online copyright information provided by other academic libraries. This was based on the presumption that, in ways similar to CSUL, the web —through library portals—is often used by other academic libraries as the primary mechanism to disseminate information regarding US copyright law, local/institutional copyright policies, and educational services on intellectual property issues. Several online web guides from other academic
libraries served helpful as the LCTF considered the design and content of the copyright LibGuide. In addition, once the CSUL copyright subject guide was completed, the task force members reviewed web-based copyright information provided by other academic libraries as a means to guide revisions to pre-existing copyright information found within various CSUL departmental and unit web pages (e.g. course reserves, faculty services, archives and special collections). These revisions were designed to enhance clarity of content and discoverability of information.
As implied in the previous paragraphs, copyright information within the CSUL website has evolved in answer to the growing complexity of intellectual property issues facing the library staff and campus at large. What, then, can other web sites show us in regards to how academic libraries have adapted to the new demands for copyright information and services from their constituencies, as well as the demands from publishers and creators for library vigilance about infractions? How accessible is this information via the web? How do academic libraries define their role? What other campus services are referenced via these websites? Is there language used that targets specific constituencies (e.g., students, faculty, administrative staff) or is there a "one size fits all approach" to describing copyright-based policy? Using the cohort of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) as a suitable representative of academic libraries as a whole this article will examine the local copyright activities and web-presence of 20 ARL peers, selected via random sampling. This survey was conducted, in part, to help inform CSUL and other libraries who may be in the process of revising and expanding web-based information on copyright and intellectual property, in order that such information might remain useful—and accessible—to various local constituencies.
A review of literature related to the historical and theoretical underpinnings of current copyright activities in academic libraries, as well as other topics examined within this article, was conducted via searches of the Library Science database Library Literature and Information Science. The author also consulted several books pertaining to copyright issues previously referenced. Due to the changing aspects of copyright regulations and web delivery mechanisms, the majority of pieces mentioned in the following sections were published during the last ten years (2000-2010).
The Growing Complexity of Copyright Issues in Academic Libraries
Almost thirty-five years of legislation since the Copyright Revision Act of 1976 has redefined how librarians and archivists view their responsibilities regarding copyright oversight of their print and digital collections. Lowry (2001), Maher (2001), Schneider (2001), Shuler (2003), and Ferullo (2004) all note that the constitutional origins of copyright legislation in this country hewed a balance between protection of creators/private individuals' economic rights and the rights of the public's access to useful knowledge (often referred to as the "greater good'). With the Copyright Revision Act of 1976—the first major change to US copyright law since the 1909 Act—the balance began to tip in favor of the individual and his/her economic rights as creator, as publishers and corporations become increasingly alarmed at the greater potential for violations of copyright by individuals. Their fear has been, in large part, due to the advances in digital and online technology which have allowed for freer dissemination of, and copying of, intellectual property and creative content. Subsequent legislation towards the end of the last century and the beginning of the new millennium, such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1998 and the Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization (TEACH) Act of 2002, have further codified the rights of creators—both to protect their work and prosecute for violations—as the law tries to keep apace of the constant changes in digital technology and social networking, which makes content more accessible to the public and, in the eyes of content creators and their representatives, more vulnerable to infringement.
These recent changes in copyright legislation have especially affected academic libraries which, as information-driven enterprises for research and scholarship, are based on the tenets of academic freedom and dependent on their ability to freely broker and disseminate information (intellectual property) to their clientele of faculty, students, staff, researchers, and community members, for the purposes of research, scholarship, and learning. As Lowry notes:
Lawsuits too, based on new copyright legislation, have impacted the environment for academic libraries and the researchers who use them. The willingness of publishers and publishing consortia to prosecute if they see their intellectual property at risk (e.g. Basic Books v. Kinkos; American Geophysical Union v. Texaco; and, more recently, Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press and SAGE Publications v. Georgia State University) have redefined reserves and coursepack protocol, and cases against researchers involving the anti-circumvention restrictions contained within the DMCA have "showcased the chilling effect… on research and academic freedom" (Ferullo, 2004, p.28). Increased legal scrutiny of copyright coverage of unpublished works, since the 1976 act, as well as increased digitization of local collections within academic libraries, have heightened copyright concerns regarding unpublished materials—including the responsibility of due diligence for finding creators of "orphan works" and securing permissions where copyright of materials has not been deeded to the repository upon accession.
Lastly, the conservative nature of most university administrators and legal counsels, which is often in stark contrast with the "sample and share" mentality of millennial-generation students, reinforces the uncertainty of the new copyright landscape in academic libraries, as academic librarians find themselves caught in the middle: treading the line between the unaccustomed role of "information police" and the more comfortable role of information facilitators. While not lawyers, academic librarians have found that they have had to take part in a steep learning curve on the ever-changing legalities of copyright law and its effect on library functions and services(see Russell, 2004).
Although the ARL currently has seventeen Canadian libraries in its membership base, a thorough examination of the historic effects of Canada's copyright law on Canadian academic libraries was, unfortunately, outside the scope of this literature review. This said, Joan Dalton's Electronic Reserves and the Copyright Challenge in Canada (2007)is a good introduction tocopyright issues effecting Canadian libraries in the first decade of the 2000s.
Advocacy for the Role of Academic Librarians as Copyright Leaders
Advocacy for the academic librarians to take on the role of copyright leaders at their respective campuses was found in several articles within this literature review. In his 2003 article "Copyright on Campus: Librarians Remain at the Head of the Class", Edward Colleran notes that:
K. Matthew Danes (2008) makes the case for academic institutions' hiring of designated copyright officers "to help them or their libraries manage and resolve various copyright issues and the innumerable contexts in which they arise" (Dames, 2008, p. 16). Dames makes mention of Columbia's Kenneth Crews and Cornell's Peter Hirtle as examples of the type of copyright teacher/advisor he is advocating for. On a related note, Susie Quartey (2007) describes Brigham Young University Library's collaboration with staff from the BYU Copyright Licensing Office to create a campus copyright education program, including a copyright-based website and handouts. In a visually entertaining handbook on copyright published by the American Library Association in 2004, Carrie Russell notes that librarians and copyright are "a match made in heaven" and goes on to encourage librarians to become advocates for progressive copyright legislation beyond the walls of libraries and academia by staying abreast of copyright trends and communicating with legislative officials. (Russell, 2004, pp. 133-135)
Copyright Information on Library Websites
Several targeted surveys of copyright information on library websites have been conducted during the first decade of the 2000s. Usually, these surveys were limited to specific departments or activities within academic libraries (e.g., Schlosser's 2009 survey on copyright statements on digital library collections and Gould, Lipinski & Buchanan's 2005 survey on copyright policy for reserves and electronic reserves). Kelley, Bonner & McMichael's 2002 survey on copyright policies for courseware materials was conducted in order to discern "best practices in intellectual property policies concerning faculty copyright ownership of course materials developed for distribution" via the web. In this study, a distributed survey was sent to seventy-nine academic libraries, with sixty-eight responding. (Kelley, Bonner & McMichael, 2002, pp. 255-266)
In an unusual twist on library copyright website surveys, Sharchaf & Rubenstein (2007) conducted an international comparative survey of copyright information on academic library websites of three countries: Israel, Russia, and the US—using a sampling pool of all of the university libraries in Israel, all of the Russian libraries on the RUSLANET and the Libweb list for Russia, Ukraine and Eastern Europe, and the first fifty libraries on the alphabetically-ordered ARL member list. Unlike the qualitative findings discussed in this article, Sharchaf & Rubenstein's quantitative pattern analysis compared the number of clicks it took for them to get to copyright information on US and Israeli sites, as well as the average number of words, pages, and links devoted to copyright on all US and Israeli sites. The authors also compared the differences in organizational context between US and Israeli website information.
Use of Subject Guides by Library Constituencies
With the ease of using new web-based platforms, many institutions, including CSUL, have opted to mount topical material—including information related to intellectual property issues—in subject guide formats such as LibGuides. Perhaps because of this trend, a variety of articles have appeared in the literature on usage of subject guides by library constituencies, including Jackson & Pellacks's 2004 examination of topical subject guides in the areas of philosophy, communications, astronomy and chemistry on ARL library sites and Staley's 2007 examination of student usage of subject guides in the topical areas of nursing, journalism & mass communications, and organization & management. While Courtois, Higgins & Kapur's 2005 report on an assessment study of subject guides at George Washington University found that the Gelman Library "did not have a problem with low use of guides" (p.189), other assessment studies cited in Reeb & Gibbons note "poor rate of return" in usage of subject guides at other academic institutions. (2004, pp.123-130) Articles by Tchangalova & Feigley (2008) and Becker (2009) promote incorporation of Web 2.0 technologies to make subject guides more relevant to student users.
Clearly, then, there is some controversy regarding the use of library subject guides, despite their continued creation by academic librarians. Some remedy to the low usage of subject guides by undergraduates might be found in Beker's 2009 article which advocates the use of Web 2.0 applications for subject guides to create "enriched, interactive experiences" (p. 206). Another remedy to the "buried alive" factor of subject guides can be found in the copyright outreach strategies advocated by Quartey (2007). Better knowledge of subject guides could also be attained through the instructional classes that many undergraduates attend in their freshman and sophomore years.
Academic Web Site Evaluations
While falling outside of the targeted years of this literature review, the author would like to note a comprehensive survey comparison of the web content of research university libraries vs. two-year college libraries that was conducted by Cohen & Still in 1999. A general evaluation of ARL-member web sites noting the existence of online catalogs, FAQs, and site maps as well as navigation paths to the catalog, item renewal, ILL and service was conducted by Detlor & Lewis in 2006. Based on these findings, Detlor & Lewis also gave recommendations for better web design in the text of their article. Lastly, a 2004 general survey by Cassner & Adams analyzed Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA) websites for their usefulness to distance learner user populations.
3. Sample Methodology
Rationale for Random Sample and Index Selection
Due to the small number of member libraries in the ARL a systematic random sample was deemed the best method for generating a diverse sample of cohort libraries (for a definition of systematic random sampling see http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/sampprob.php ). This sampling was generated from the ARL Library Investment Index 2007-08 Rank Order Table 21 which ranked ARL libraries in numerical order, combining the elements of Salaries, Budget, Material Expenditures, Number of Professional Support/Staff as of August 2009. The Investment Index was selected over other ARL lists (e.g. alphabetical) in order to ensure that the sampled population would not be skewed negatively or positively by available resources (see http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/arlstat08.pdf ).
From a table of randomly generated numbers, the author started with the third name on the list of the ARL Library Investment Index and then went on to select every fifth institution. This sampling method garnered twenty-three names in all.
Although there are similarities between Canada's copyright law and the US copyright law, certain variances in Canadian law, which would of course affect the tone of Canadian academic copyright issues, necessitated the exclusion of three Canadian ARL libraries that came up in the random sampling. This paired the number of ARL libraries surveyed down to twenty. While the author strove to identify "best examples" of copyright information on cohort websites, for the sake of anonymity no ARL institution has been identified by name within these sample findings.
Novice User and Experienced User
To better gauge the accessibility of copyright information off of selected library websites, all twenty ARL academic library sites were searched independently by a library faculty "experienced user" (the author of this article) and an undergraduate "novice user". The novice user was a junior-year double major in music and history who had worked within the CSUL system in the Archives and Special Collections Department. While having experience with searching the CSUL website for research projects, as well as possessing a rough understanding of the intellectual property issues important to undergraduates (e.g. proper citation of sources and prevention of file sharing), the novice user had not previously searched the websites of the ARL libraries surveyed. The novice user was given a very brief overview of the project and a review of the survey worksheet, using the CSUL website as an example. Website searches were conducted in the spring and summer of 2010—with a final review of all websites by the experienced user in late July of 2010.
Questions to be Answered and Sample Worksheet
Before embarking on this sample, the author was curious about the following questions with regards to copyright information disseminated on cohort library websites:
Where is copyright information housed on ARL library websites?
How "findable" is this information? Is it easier for an experienced user to locate than for a "novice" to locate?
How heavily reliant are ARL libraries on subject guides to convey information about copyright? Do these guides link to other university departments also involved in copyright?
Additionally, the author also wished to discern where the majority of libraries sat on the spectrum between "innovative copyright leader" (e.g., the library as a campus leader in copyright with a designated copyright officer or designated service within the library) and "presence neutral" (e.g., no visible presence of copyright activities within the library or no copyright-related presence on the website).
In order to better tabulate results, a worksheet was created to record sample findings and web site navigational paths. A copy of this worksheet can be found in Appendix B.
Sample Findings: Location of Copyright Information on ARL Websites
Only three library web pages in this sample had copyright/intellectual property information and services directly listed on their home pages: one land grant's "Copyright" link to its University Copyright Office Page; a private Midwest institution's "Copyright Information Center" link to its general information; and a private East Coast institution's helpful side bar links, presumably directed to students, entitled: "Citing Your Sources" and "What is Plagiarism?". The land grant's University Copyright Office page got positive comments from this survey's novice user, who noted that the easy access to the copyright page "would be very helpful because it [leads to information that] addresses issues specific to different groups of people and fully explains copyright laws and procedures". Of special interest to the author was the Midwest institution's Copyright Information Center, which indicates collaboration between the Library, IT Services, the Provost's Office, and the Office of Legal Counsel –reflective of the many players in academia's copyright universe. The author was also intrigued by the idea of a cyber information center where the policies and resources of one institution could be gathered in one convenient and prominent location.
Nineteen out of the twenty ARL libraries sampled had copyright information on their course reserves pages. Usually this information was geared to faculty placing materials on reserve; many cited university policies. Usually this information was only one to one-and- a-half pages in length, often linked off the course reserve home page. In one unique case, library staff had created a section on "Copyright, e-reserves & linking" within their LibGuide pages entitled "Library Resources and Support for Online Course Design".
Archives and Special Collections
All twenty ARL libraries sampled had copyright information linked to their Archives and Special Collections pages. Usually this information was found under "Services", "Services to Researchers", "Services and Policies", "Policies and Procedures"," Reproduction Policies", and "Using the Collections".
On some of the sites, information was found directly under "Copyright Information" or "Copyrights and Permissions". Of special note was one Midwest institution's extensive information within its "Introductory Resource Page for Researching Primary Historical Materials", which had information on the Use of Intellectual Property—Copyright and Fair Use.
For the purposes of this review, a digital/institutional repository (IR) was defined as housing some digital scholarly content of an institution's faculty, students and staff—beyond the digitized local collections of an institution's archives, special collections, or special branch library. Before embarking on this review, the author was especially interested to see how intellectual property information was displayed on library IR sites, as digitization projects and IRs have often spurred academic librarians and archivists to take a deeper examination of copyright issues affecting academic research, scholarship and publication. Writing about the Georgia Institute of Technology's SMARTech IR in 2007, Tyler Walters noted that IRs are facilitating the reinvention of academic libraries, as "they are no longer passive receivers of information but active disseminators of intellectual output for entire universities" (p. 223). In the same article, Walters went on to observe that "as librarians become committed stewards of their universities' digital resources, they are organizing, preserving, providing access to, and creating rights management systems for these kinds of institutional resources as part of their daily responsibilities" (Walters, 2007, p. 215).
While the majority of the parent institutions of ARL libraries sampled had IRs, the majority of copyright information was found on the secondary pages of these sites, often within sections directed towards author deposit of materials (e.g., "Author FAQ", "Legal Considerations", "General Deposit Guidelines", and "Submitting Content Guide"). It's important to note that not all of these IRs were linked off of library websites, as some universities' IRs had main sites which referenced, but were independent of, their institution's main library. Also it was found that, in a few cases, there was cross referencing between some Scholarly Communication pages off of ARL sites and "stand alone" IR sites. One good example of this synergy was found between the eScholarship Repository "umbrella" site of a large West Coast institution and the "Scholarly Communication" and "Scholarly Communication and Management Program" sites of two of its system's libraries.
Subject Guides and Pathfinders
Twelve out of the twenty libraries sampled had subject/research guides with all or part of sections dedicated to copyright and intellectual property issues, labeled under the following variety of titles:
Many of these guides contained information similar to CSUL's LibGuide, but some subject guides offered Web 2.0 tutorials and videos that would seem to be especially appealing to undergraduates (e.g., "Plagiarism Tutorial"). A humorous variant of the copyright FAQs found within many subject guides, entitled "Copyright Myths", was found within one institution's subject guide.
In the cases where libraries did not have subject guides or pathfinders pertaining to copyright, information was often found on sites labeled "Scholarly Communication". The language within these sites was, for the most part, more geared towards faculty and graduate students, than undergraduates.
Other ("How Do I?"; "Ask a Librarian"; "Faculty Services", "Student Services", "About Us", etc)
All twenty ARL libraries sampled had some sort of copyright or intellectual property information linked off of their services or FAQ/help areas, irregardless of the presence of a subject guide.One cohort institution offered a nice parsing out of copyright and intellectual property information for different constituencies under the sections: Resources for Graduate Students ("Your Intellectual Property"); Resources for Faculty ("Research Support" and "Intellectual Property"); and Undergraduate Students ("Cite Sources").
Additional Findings: Discoverability and Campus Leadership Roles
Ease of Locating Copyright Information (Novice User and Experienced User)
This sampling confirmed that in some areas of any academic library's web pages, copyright information is provided for those who "know what they're looking for" and is much harder, if not impossible, to find for the novice user. One of the most startling examples of this was demonstrated in the difference in findings between the experienced user and novice user regarding location of copyright policies and information off of ARL Archives and Special Collections pages. While the novice user had experience working in the CSUL Archives and Special Collections department, she was only able to locate copyright information off of seven Archives/Special Collections web pages. This contrasted drastically with the findings of the experienced user, who found information on copyright policies and permissions off of all twenty ARL web pages. Part of the discrepancy in findings may have been due to the terminology used for researchers of primary source materials (e.g., "permissions"). Another may have been the navigational complexity of some ARL sites. Confusion existed with our novice user even with regards to our own CSUL Archives website as to where copyright information was housed. Clearly this has served for food for thought, and will be considered during the upcoming redesign of the CSUL Archives and Special Collections webpage.
One unexpected finding of this sample was the difficulty in locating institutional and digital repositories off of many library homepages—both for the novice user and the experienced user—which affected the locating of copyright information related to the intellectual content ingested in these repositories. While the experienced user found institutional or digital repositories for the majority of libraries in this survey, in some cases she had to resort to using the OpenDOAR Directory of Open Access Repositories (www.opendoar.org) to confirm the presence of a campus institutional repository (using the definition outlined in Section 4). The OpenDOAR directory also provided links that allowed her to trace backwards to navigational paths to the repository off of a library's homepage. In some cases it was discovered that there was no navigational path to the repository off of the library homepage. More research might be conducted to suggest ways that libraries might provide easier access to their institutional repositories—even for those that are maintained primarily by another administrative unit of the university (e.g., information technology). Perhaps, though, the simplest solution is one provided by the several libraries in the survey that listed their repository right on the home page.
Innovative Leaders vs. Status Quo
While all libraries surveyed had some information on copyright off of their websites and some policies regarding copyright and intellectual property matters, very few libraries fell within the "innovative leader" category. Clearly, while there is advocacy for librarians taking the campus "leadership" role in copyright matters, few academic libraries are currently at the forefront. One can only speculate why this is the case. Constraints in funding for higher education, shifting priorities of top-level administration, and the increasing workloads for many academic librarians may prevent the funding and time needed to train library staff on advanced copyright issues (e.g., through certification programs) or the hiring of librarians designated to be copyright experts. The role of campus information technology departments, teaching and learning centers, and offices of general counsel in disseminating copyright information might also have bearing on the role of academic librarians as copyright leaders. This all said, it is important to note that ARL copyright leaders such as Duke, Columbia, and Cornell were not included in this survey, due to its random sample selection process.
This review of ARL websites revealed a diverse array of approaches to the dissemination and display of intellectual property information. While the majority of libraries sampled fell firmly within the "status quo" with regards to their campus copyright leadership activities, it is heartening to see the dedication of academic librarians to explain the complexities of copyright policy, law, and protocol to their campus constituencies—as demonstrated by the various research guides, FAQs, scholarly communications pages, and library policy pages devoted to copyright information. This said, it is sobering to note that the hard work of library science professionals across the cohort is often buried alive—and not easily discovered by users with "novice" or even "average" web search skills. Aside from navigational considerations, terminology, too, should be a consideration when embarking on creating a copyright-related web page. As seen in the findings of this sample, the novice user was unable to locate some copyright sites because of confusion about the way that they were labeled.
While one cannot gauge a campus' marketing and outreach efforts through a survey of websites, this remains an important aspect of the dissemination of copyright information—and a significant solution to the issues of discoverability of information examined within this article. In fact, perhaps the most effective approach to disseminating copyright information to campus constituencies combines targeted marketing and outreach activities with robust websites created by campus copyright players (e.g., the Library, legal counsel, reprographic services, etc.). For example, Susie Quartey (2007) notes that the Copyright Licensing Office at Brigham Young University knew that "it would require a concerted effort to market a service that most people did not want to admit they needed" (p.96). To this end, BYU's staff "discovered ideas from clever television, radio, and print advertisement" to promote copyright awareness and the services that the campus had to offer (including information on the web). Presentations on copyright provided to staff and students was another way of reinforcing the web-based copyright information found at BYU (Quartey, 2007, pp. 93-100).
Various factors, including recommendations from CSU's Library-IT Task Force and our targeted ingest goals for the CSUL Digital Repository, have necessitated that CSUL focus its current external copyright outreach on assisting faculty with modifying their publication agreements with vendors. This said, copyright issues continue to weave its way into our daily lives and we have continued the dialogue with campus, most recently through opening up a dialogue with the intellectual property specialist from CSU's Office of General Counsel. Although there are no plans to expand upon what we have on our site for now, this sample has been informative for whatever next steps we take in refining our copyright web presence and defining our role in our campus' firmament.
Becker, B. W. (2009). Subject Guides 2.0: A Look at LibGuides and Jing. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian 28(4), 206-209.
Besek, J. M. (2009). Copyright and Related Issues Relevant to Digital Preservation and Dissemination of Unpublished Pre-1972 Sound Recordings by Libraries and Archives. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources and the Library of Congress.
Besek, J. M. (2003). Copyright Issues Relevant to the Creation of a Digital Archive. Microform & Imaging Review 32 (3), 86-97.
Cohen, L. B. & Still, J.M. (1999). A Comparison of Research University and Two-Year College Library Web Sites: Content, Functionality, and Form. College& Research Libraries (May 1999), 275-289.
Circular 92: Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code (June 2003).
Cassner, M. & Adams, K. E. (2004). Academic Library Web Sites for Distance Learners in Greater Western Library Alliance Member Institutions. Internet Reference Services Quarterly 9 (3/4), 33-42.
Colleran, E. W. (2003). Copyright on Campus: Librarians Remain at the Head of the Class. Against the Grain (November 2003), 98-99.
Courtois, M., Higgins, M.E. & Kapur, A. (2005). Was this Guide Helpful? Users' Perceptions of Subject Guides. Reference Services Review 33(2), 188-196.
Crews, K. D. (2006). Copyright Law for Librarians and Educators: Creative Strategies and Practical Solutions (2nd. ed.) Chicago: American Library Association.
Dalton, J. T. (2007). Electronic Reserves and the Copyright Challenge in Canada. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve 17(1), 97-120.
Dames, K. M. (2008). Making a Case for Copyright Officers. Information Today (July/August 2008), 16.
Detlor, B. & Lewis. V. (2006). Academic Library Web Sites: Current Practice and Future Directions."The Journal of Academic Librarianship 32 (3), 251-58.
"The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, U.S. Copyright Office Summary." http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf (accessed April 16, 2010).
Ferullo, D. L. (2004). Major Copyright Issues in Academic Libraries. Journal of Library Administration 40 (1 ), 23-40.
Gould, T. H.P., Lipinski. T.A. & Buchanan, E.A. (2005). Copyright Policies and the Deciphering of Fair Use in the Creation of Reserves at University Libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 31 (3), 182-197.
Jackson, R. & Pellack, L.J. (2004).Internet Subject Guides in Academic Libraries: An Analysis of Contents, Practices, and Opinions. Reference & User Services Quarterly 43(4),319-327.
Kelley, K. B., Bonner, K. & McMichael, J.S. (2002). Intellectual Property, Ownership and Digital Course Materials: A Study of Intellectual Property Policies at Two-and Four-Year Colleges and Universities. portal: Libraries and the Academy 2(2), 255-266.
Kyrillidou, M.& Bland,L. (Eds.). (2009). ARL Statistics 2007-2008. Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Libraries. http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/arlstat08.pdf (last accessed August 1, 2010).
Lowry, C. B. (2001). Fair Use and Digital Publishing: An Academic Librarian's Perspective. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 1(2), 191-196.
Lunceford, B. & Lunceford, S.(2008). The Irrelevance of Copyright in the Public Mind. Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property 33, LexisNexis Academic http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/delivery (accessed July, 21, 2010).
Maher, W. J. (2001). Between Authors and Users: Archivists in the Copyright Vise. Archival Issues 26(1), 63-75.
Morris, S. E. & Del Bosque, D. (2010). Forgotten Resources: Subject Guides in the Era of Web 2.0. Technical Services Quarterly 27, 178-93.
Metcalf, A., Diaz, V. & Wagoner, R. (2003). Academe, Technology, Society, and the Market: Four Frames of Reference for Copyright and Fair Use. portal: Libraries and the Academy 3(2), 191-206.
Negrucci, T., Bishop, J., MacWaters, C. & Pascal, D. (2009). Libraries Copyright Task Force Recommendations Colorado State University Libraries Internal Publication.
Quartey, S. (2007). Developing a Campus Copyright Education Program. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve 18(1), 93-100.
Reeb, B. & Gibbons,S. (2004). Students, Librarians, and Subject Guides; Improving a Poor Rate of Return. portal: Libraries and the Academy 4(1), 123-130.
Rupp-Serrano, K. J. (1997).Copyright and Fair Use: A Policy Analysis. Government Information Quarterly 14(2), 155-172.
Russell, C. (Ed.). (2004). Complete Copyright: An Everyday Guide for Librarians. Chicago: American Library Association, Office for Information Technology Policy.
Staley, S. M. (March 2007) Academic Subject Guides: A Case Study of Use at San Jose State University. College & Research Libraries, 119-139.
Shachaf, P. & Rubenstein, E. (2007). A Comparative Analysis of Libraries' Approaches to Copyright: Israel, Russia, and the U.S. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 33(1), 94-105.
Schlosser, M. (2009). Unless Otherwise Indicated: A Survey of Copyright Statements on Digital Library Collections. College& Research Libraries 70(4), 371-385.
Schneider, P. (2001). Copyright Laws and Ethics in an Academic Library. Current Studies in Librarianship 25(1), 71-79.
Schuler, J. A. (2003). Distance Education, Copyrights Rights, and the New TEACH Act. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 20(1), 49-51.
Tchangalova, N. & Feigley,A. (2008). Subject Guides: Putting a New Spin on an Old Concept."Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship 9(3), http://southernlibrarianship.icaap.org/content/v09n03/tchangalova_n01.html (accessed July 22, 2010).
Thaxton, S. A. (2005). A Study of the Effects of Information on Students' Understanding of Copyright Ethics. Master's Thesis (MSIS) University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Wagner, V.H. (2008). Processing Reserves, Seeking Permissions and Engaging the Campus: How the Library Serves as the Copyright Touchstone. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve 18(2), 247-254.
Walters, T. O. (2007). Reinventing the Library—How Repositories Are Causing Librarians to Rethink Their Professional Roles. portal: Libraries and the Academy 7(7), 213-225.
Appendix A. ARL Library Websites Surveyed
Arizona State University http://lib.asu.edu/ (accessed May 28, 2010 and July 24, 2010)
University of California, Davis http://www.lib.ucdavis.edu/ (accessed April 23, 2010; July 23, 2010; and July 31, 2010)
University of California, Irvine http://www.lib.uci.edu/ (accessed May 3, 2010; July 25, 2010; and July 31, 2010)
University of Chicago http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/e/index.html
(accessed May 28, 2010 and July 25, 2010)
University of Colorado http://ucblibraries.colorado.edi/ (accessed April 23, 2010 and July 25, 2010)
University of Delaware http://www.lib.udel.edu/ (accessed 4/19/10 and July 24, 2010)
Georgia Institute of Technology http://www.library.gatech.edu/
(accessed April 9, 2010; April 12, 2010; and July 23, 2010)
University of Georgia http://www.libs.uga.edu/ (accessed April 26, 2010 and July 24, 2010)
Howard University http://www.howard.edu/library/ (accessed April 12, 2010; April 16, 2010; and July 23, 2010)
University of Illinois, Chicago http://library.uic.edu/ (accessed April 19, 2010; April 21, 2010; and July 25, 2010)
University of Illinois, Urbana http://www.library.illinois.edu/ (accessed May 28, 2010 and July 25, 2010)
University of Iowa http://www.lib.uiowa.edu/ (accessed May 3, 2010 and July 24, 2010)
New York University http://library.nyu.edu/ (accessed May 28, 2010 and July 24, 2010)
University of Oklahoma http://libraries.ou.edu/ (accessed April 26, 2010 and July 24, 2010)
University of Oregon http://libweb.uoregon.edu/ (accessed April 14, 2010 and July 24, 2010)
Pennsylvania State University http://www.library.upenn.edu/ (accessed May 28, 2010 and July 24, 2010)
Purdue University http://www.lib.purdue.edu/ (accessed April 30, 2010; May 3, 2010; and July 24, 2010)
University of Southern California http://www.usc.edu/libraries/ (accessed June 1, 2010 and July 23, 2010)
University of Southern Illinois http://www.lib.siu.edu/ (accessed April 16, 2010 and July 24, 2010)
Washington State University http://www.wsulibs.wsu.edu/ (accessed April 9, 2010; April 14, 2010; and July 24, 2010)
Appendix B: ARL Sample Form
NAME OF ARL INSTITUTION: NAME OF LIBRARY:
IS THIS THE ARL INSTITUTION'S MAIN/RESEARCH LIBRARY? SPECIAL/AUXILLARY LIBRARY?
A. Reference/Access to Copyright Information, Policy and Services on the Library Home Page
1. Is there outright reference to copyright policy/copyright services on the ARL library home page? (terms to look for on home page include: "Copyright"; "Copyright Services"; "Campus Copyright Policy"; etc.) Can I get access to copyright information in one click, without "drilling down"?
Yes No If "Yes" list URL here:
If "Yes" list navigation path (e.g. Home>Copyright Reminder), URL, and nature of information (e.g. FAQ, policies, services) here:
B. Reference/Access to Copyright Information, Policy, and Services within Library Departmental/Topical/Service Web Pages
2. Can I find mention of/get access to copyright information/policy/services by clicking on the links to the following departmental/topical/service pages off of the ARL library home page?
2a. Research/Research and Information Guides/Lib Guides/Subject Guides/Scholarly Communications
If "Yes" list navigation path, URL, and nature of information here:
2b. Course Reserves/Reserves/ILL
If "Yes" list navigation path, URL, and nature of information here:
2c. Archives and Special Collections
If "Yes" list navigation path, URL, and nature of information here:
2d. Other (e.g. "How Do I…?"; "Ask a Librarian", "Faculty Services", "Student Services", "About Us", etc)
If "Yes" list navigation path, URL, and nature of information here:
C. References to Copyright Within Institutional Repository Pages
3. Does this ARL library have an Institutional or Digital Repository?
3a. If "Yes", is there mention of copyright policies or procedures on the library's main IR page?
If "Yes" list URL, and nature of information here:
Category Based on Web Search
A. Copyright Leader= A designated copyright officer/office or designated service within the library (librarians as campus leaders/active involvement in campus). Copyright services front and center on homepage. Copyright keywords used on home page.
B. Status Quo/General= No designated officer/office or focused service within the library but tailor-made information given through subject guides and IR guidelines pages. Mention of copyright on secondary pages—usually scattered throughout website. May have links to other sites, general FAQ, general fair use guidelines, often through "Reserves"; "Research"; "Subject Guides" webpage
C. "Presence Neutral"=No visible presence of copyright activities within the library/No webpages disseminating information on copyright or intellectual property