Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Crews Expert Report

Crews Expert Report

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,387 |Likes:
Published by phirtle1
Expert report by Kenneth Crews on e-reserves
Expert report by Kenneth Crews on e-reserves

More info:

Published by: phirtle1 on Nov 13, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Expert Report of Kenneth D. Crews, J.D., Ph.D.
Cambridge University Press v. Patton, et al.
Civil Action No. 1:08-CV-1425-ODEIn the United States Federal District CourtNorthern District of GeorgiaJune 1, 2009
Case 1:08-cv-01425-ODE Document 104-2 Filed 06/01/2009 Page 1 of 72
Kenneth D. Crews (June 1, 2009)1
 Table of ContentsPart I: Background of the ReportPart II: Background and Credentials of ExpertPart III: Resources and Documents ReviewedPart IV: The Growth and Importance of E-ReservesPart V: The Law of Copyright and Fair UsePart VI: Model Policies for Fair Use and ReservesPart VII: Copyright and Fair Use Policies at Colleges and UniversitiesPart VIII: Common Elements of an E-Reserve PolicyPart IX: Overview and Evaluation of the University System of Georgia CopyrightPolicyPart X: ConclusionBibliography of Secondary SourcesAppendices
Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Kenneth D. CrewsAppendix B: Classroom Guidelines (1976)Appendix C: ALA Model Policy (1982)Appendix D: CONFU Reserves Guidelines (1996)Appendix E: Copies of Policies Summarized in Part VII of this Report
Case 1:08-cv-01425-ODE Document 104-2 Filed 06/01/2009 Page 2 of 72
Kenneth D. Crews (June 1, 2009)2 
Part I: Background of the Report
I have been retained by the law firm of King & Spalding to prepare this report inconnection with the case of Cambridge University Press v. Patton, et al., filed in theFederal District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Civil Action No.1:08-CV-1425-ODE (hereinafter the “Current Case”).King & Spalding represents the defendants in the Current Case. The allegations againstthe defendants center on claims of copyright infringement in connection with the copyingof articles from periodicals and excerpts from books (the “Instructional Materials”) infurtherance of the teaching needs of Georgia State University (“GSU”). In particular, thedefendants are accused of making copies of the Instructional Materials and making themavailable to students, for reading in connection with the courses at GSU, through a libraryservice known as “electronic reserves” (hereinafter “E-Reserves”).Certain named officials of GSU are accused of infringing copyrights held by the plaintiffsin certain specified works. Copyright infringement, in the context of E-Reserves, mayoccur if the library, for example, makes a digital scan of the Instructional Materials andallows students to access and perhaps to download, copies of the Instructional Materialsthrough the networked E-Reserve system. Such activities are not copyright infringementif they are within fair use. Fair use is a statutorily established exception to or limitationon the rights of copyright owners. Uses that are within fair use are deemed by statute notan infringement of copyright. In response to that possibility, GSU had adopted a policyfor the use of materials, including uses on E-Reserves, and the university has revised thatstandard in light of the Current Case.This report will examine the circumstances of E-Reserves at GSU and the current state of the law of copyright as applied to E-Reserves. Any attempt to make a mere “snapshot”of current conditions would be misleading. This report will instead place these issues inthe context of the changing state of education, publishing, technology, and the law. Allof these circumstances will likely remain in steady transition. This report willdemonstrate that E-Reserves and the law of fair use today are not necessarily the same asthey have been in the recent past. One can infer that the near future will likely bringfurther change. This report will accordingly demonstrate that a flexible understanding of fair use better reflects the law and can better serve future needs.
Case 1:08-cv-01425-ODE Document 104-2 Filed 06/01/2009 Page 3 of 72

Activity (13)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
tegwakhe4502 liked this
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Kevin Chan liked this
kgruben liked this
Errost liked this
Jackie McCloud liked this
ericarobinson liked this
janisbru liked this
Renee Hobbs liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->