MLA Position Statements and FAQs
Copyright Liability FAQ
This document on copyright liability is intended as a guide to assist
librarians in their practice. It is based on the ideas and interpretations
of the author in her capacity as a librarian and does not purport to be
a legal statement or to serve as legal advice. Because of the nature of
the subject matter, in which legal rights and liabilities often are dependent
upon the specific facts and circumstances involved, readers are encouraged
to consult with competent legal counsel as appropriate.
Liability is a legal term. What exactly does it mean?
The term "liability" is used to refer to one's legal responsibility
for his or her conduct. However, being liable for an action, such as a
violation of copyright law, is only half of the equation. Equally important
is the question of the "remedy" to which the aggrieved party
is entitled, or what punishment will be meted out for the violation, either
to discourage future behavior or to compensate the person holding the
copyright. While some legal actions may in the end result in minimal monetary
"damages" as the remedy, it is clear from the copyright law
that the consequences of copyright infringement can be severe. Thus, a
goal of preventing liability for copyright infringement is important,
and policies and procedures should be in place so that library staff are
aware of the guidelines and can make appropriate and defendable decisions
when necessary.
Who can sue?
Only the owner of rights pursuant to a valid copyright (for purposes of
this paper, the "copyright owner") can sue and becomes the plaintiff
in a copyright action. In the event of infringement, the copyright owner
has three years after the date when he knew or should have known about
the infringement to bring an action. Although registration is technically
optional, it is generally required before a copyright owner can bring
an infringement action. Timely registration also permits a court to award
"statutory damages" (discussed below), attorney fees and court
costs. If the copyright has been transferred, the plaintiff must prove
this information. It is important for libraries to remember that getting
copyright permission from the author of a work will not be valid if the
author has transferred his or her rights to a publisher. In addition,
materials that a person prepares in the course of his or her job would
probably be considered "work for hire" and it would then be
the employer who holds the copyright. An action for copyright infringement
would have to be brought in federal court. It is important to note that
each unauthorized copy made or distributed of a work can be considered
one "act of infringement."
If a copyright owner is the plaintiff in a copyright action, who is the defendant?
The defendant may be the person who made the unauthorized copy, or even
a third party if that person profits from the infringement. A person or
organization found to have violated the copyright law is known as an infringer.
What is an infringement?
Congress grants broad and exclusive rights to the copyright owner. These
rights include the rights of reproduction, distribution, adaptation, performance,
and display. A wide variety of materials are protected under copyright
law, including literary works, photographs, sound recordings, and audiovisuals.
It is easy to list several types of activities that would be copyright
infringement, including making copies, selling copies, preparing derivative
works, including translation, and showing videotapes or performing a play
or music for an audience.
I footnote everything. Isn't this enough for copyright law?
It is important to distinguish copyright infringement from plagiarism.
While providing a footnote for another author's words and ideas is required
in order to give proper credit and avoid intellectual dishonesty, it does
not offer protection from a charge of copyright infringement. In addition,
it is a myth that just because the use of materials is for "scholarly"
purposes, it is exempt from copyright law.
What is fair use?
Fair use is an exception to the broad and exclusive rights granted to
copyright owners. The fair use exception was developed to facilitate such
First Amendment rights as news reporting, scholarship, research and teaching.
However, the scope of fair use and whether or not an activity is within
this exception turns on four factors: the purpose of the use, the nature
of the work used, the amount of the use, and the effect of the use on
the potential market for or value of the original. There are no clear
guidelines on how these four factors might be applied in a court of law
in any given case (which ultimately will turn on its own set of facts),
and the interpretation of these factors is subject to change, particularly
in this era of new types of "works," such as Websites and computer
software.
Are there different types of infringers? It seems unfair to lump libraries with for-profit entities.
In addition to the garden variety infringement situation, there are two
special categories of infringement. If the infringement was unintentional
or the person infringing can show a good faith belief that he or she acted
within the parameters of copyright law, he or she could be termed an "innocent
infringer." On the other hand, if the infringement is done deliberately,
and particularly if substantial profits were involved, the infringement
could be termed "willful." It is important to know all three
categories of infringement, since they have a significant impact on the
damages available to the plaintiff in a case. More than likely, but certainly
not always, a library would fall into the "innocent infringer"
category.
What are some examples of "innocent infringement" in a library setting?
A common problem might be contacting the wrong party for permission to
copy a work. For example, as mentioned above, the library may have communicated
with an author named on the copyright notice, mistakenly believing that
he or she was the valid copyright owner. Permission might be given by
a junior staff member who lacks the authority to grant it. Another example
of innocent infringement might be a library which sincerely believed it
was acting within the scope of copyright law. A Web-based situation might
be the use of a photograph on a Web site where the library's efforts to
date the item were not accurate and the photograph was more recent than
expected and thus still under copyright protection. Perhaps copyright
permission had been granted, but there was a misunderstanding about how
much of a work was going to be used, with the copyright owner alleging
that the terms of the permission had been exceeded.
Our library is part of a non-profit organization and our budget is small. Why should we be worried about liability for copyright infringement?
It is important to know that liability for copyright violation attaches
whether or not the organization is for-profit or non-profit and in spite
of the size of the operation or its budget. The ability to pay a judgment
rarely factors into a decision on the merits in many civil cases. Although
it may be the library which infringes, usually the parent institution
will be held liable. And while many library budgets may be small, such
as a hospital library, the hospital's overall assets may make the copyright
action attractive enough to pursue. Bad publicity and a tarnished reputation
may be just as costly for your institution as the money it would pay in
damages.
If our library has been found liable for infringement, what do we owe the copyright owner?
There are several remedies available for those whose copyright has been
infringed. Among these are two types of "damages," (i.e., the
payment of money from the infringer to the copyright owner); they are
"actual damages" and "statutory damages". "Actual"
damages may include lost profits, compensation for loss of business opportunity,
and compensation for injury to reputation, as well as the profits the
infringer has made, unless the profits and loss to the copyright owner
are the same.
What are "statutory damages" and what are their implications when a library is liable for infringement?
If is often difficult to prove the amount of damages suffered or the profits
earned by the infringer and the burden of proof is on the copyright owner.
In recognition of these limitations, "statutory" damages are
also available as an alternative to actual damages, wherein the parameters
of monetary awards that a court can award are set by statute. However,
the copyright owner typically may not seek statutory damages (or attorney's
fees) for the infringement of a published work if the work was not registered
within three months of the last publication or prior to the infringement.
How much are statutory damages?
Statutory damages range from $500 to $20,000 per act of infringement.
In this context, the court may try to approximate what actual damages
might have been, if provided with sufficient evidence by the copyright
owner. If the infringement can be categorized as "innocent,"
the court may lower the damage award to $200 per act of infringement.
However, if the court finds that the infringement was "willful"
or that the existence of a copyright was disregarded, it may raise the
award to $100,000.
So with statutory damages, being found an "innocent infringer" is clearly better?
The court can reduce damages to only $200 per act of infringement. Under
the "innocent infringer" provision of 504(c)(2), the court "shall
remit statutory damages in any case where an infringer believed and had
reasonable grounds for believing that his or her use of the copyrighted
work was fair use under Section 107, if the infringer was. . .either an
employee or agent of a non-profit educational institution, library or
archives acting within the scope of his or her employment who, or such
institution, library or archives itself, which infringed by reproducing
the work in copies or phonorecords. . .". It is important to note
that in this context, the burden of proving that there was not good faith
rests with the plaintiff.
What other remedies are available to the plaintiff?
In addition to money damages, injunctive relief may also be granted. This
might include a temporary or permanent restraining order that stops the
infringer from making or selling any more of the copyrighted material.
In addition, the court may impound the items during the pendency of the
case and may order their destruction if they are found to infringe the
copyright. Attorney fees and court costs may be awarded to the party prevailing
in a copyright action.
For those whose violations are particularly egregious, even stronger
criminal penalties are available under Section 506, including imprisonment
and fines of up to $250,000 per individual or $500,000 for an organization.
Is there a bright line between fair use and copyright infringement?
While certain activities are without question a violation of copyright
law, many activities are in a gray area where liability might only be
determined on a case-by-case basis in a court of law. In addition, many
of the major copyright cases have involved for-profit companies and a
level of copyright violation that would have significantly affected the
financial status of a copyright owner. However, since litigation is a
time-consuming and expensive process, it may be best for a library to
err on the side of conservatism in copyright matters and be ready to document
its good faith efforts on compliance.
How can our library reduce its potential liability for copyright infringement?
In order to minimize liability exposure, the library should stay well
within the copyright guidelines. Have clear policies on what will and
will not be ordered on interlibrary loan, placed on reserve, and photocopied
on demand. In the event of a questionable activity, seek legal counsel
or conduct a brief survey of how other libraries would handle the request.
If a library goes ahead with an activity, be sure that the rationale for
proceeding is clearly documented. Provide evidence of a good faith belief
that the activity was within the guidelines.
As with any legal matter, thorough and substantive documentation is the
key. If the use of an item seems to fall outside of fair use, take the
time to get the necessary permissions or utilize the Copyright Clearing
Center (CCC).
Should all library staff understand copyright or just those in interlibrary loan?
Since there is no bright line between fair use and copyright infringement,
each member of the library's staff should be adequately trained and kept
current in copyright law, not just those who work in interlibrary loan.
Library staff are now assuming a host of duties, including Web site development,
distance learning, multimedia, and the operation of in-house fee-based
information services.
Each library staff member should understand the four factors considered
by courts to determine fair use and be able to make decisions before they
download, photocopy, link, use graphics or quotes on a Web site, or incorporate
sound or video into multimedia or distance education packages. Fortunately,
excellent workshops are available on copyright law, as are several comprehensive
but affordable books.
If we are careful to follow copyright law, could we still be sued?
Anyone can file a suit, no matter how speculative the case might be. However,
good documentation and clear policies with regard to copyright matters
can be vital to stopping a suit in its early stages, because it may reduce
the likelihood of the plaintiff prevailing, particularly since the plaintiff
might then be liable for the defendant's attorney fees and court costs.
Why can't you be more specific in what is copyright infringement and what is not?
Like many other legal matters, the question of liability for copyright
infringement turns on the particular facts in the case and in the court's
interpretation of how the law is to be applied to those facts. Therefore,
it is paramount that the library have clear policies and procedures in
place to deal with copyright matters and to be able to support any decisions
that are made with regard to copyright questions that are within the gray
area of this important and evolving field of law.
Author
Prepared February 1997
Sara Anne Hook, M.L.S., M.B.A., J.D., AHIP., Head Librarian, Indiana University
School of Dentistry, Indianapolis, IN.
For more information, contact Mary
Langman, 312.419.9094 x27.