READI

(Rights for Electronic Access to and Delivery of Information)

---

BUYER USES

Definition

This element outlines how the buyer is permitted to use the information purchased and may identify certain restrictions on that use.

Discussion

Our research identified two key principles. One is "reproduction" and the other "redistribution."

Most agreements allow users to reproduce scholarly research and information without restriction within the population or territory of its "authorized" or "permitted" users (see "Defining the User"). In our discussions, this concept closely follows the "fair use" provision of the copyright law.

Redistribution (to those outside of "permitted" users), on the other hand, implies commercial or other uses that may damage the proprietary interests of the copyright holder and is normally prohibited. Let us say that Institution A purchases information from a vendor. Institution A then allows Institution B to receive free access to the vendor's information. While no money changes hands between the two institutions, the transaction may still not be in the commercial interests of the vendor, since the vendor will not be able to sell its information to Institution B. Consequently, such free access (or redistribution) from one institution to another is usually prohibited. Obviously, unless provisions are made between the seller and buyer for actual commercial redistribution to third parties, such activities are also usually not permitted.

[NOTE TO REVIEWERS: Interlibrary loan restrictions should be identified and addressed here. We did not cover them in the session.]

Our research disclosed that, at present, many sellers seem increasingly more willing to enter agreements and undertake the risks associated with allowing buyers greater unrestricted use (and wider dissemination of information). Sellers are more comfortable with buyers employing their "best efforts" to monitor use.

In our discussions with buyers, sellers, and intermediaries, a distinction was made between books and journals. It appears that material originating from journals generally receives fewer restrictions than those applied to books (largely because the original publisher typically encourages widespread access to journals without further compensation). Publishers of books, on the other hand, are concerned when chapters (or elements) from books are disseminated widely over networks--since such access could damage sales of their books in print. Consequently, special provisions for "coursepacks" (or collections of articles) from books and/or periodicals may be included in contracts or licenses for networked information to protect the copyright holder's interests.

Benefits

By unambiguously outlining what uses are and are not permitted, both parties come to a general understanding of what is expected. With the current amount of uncertainty in this emerging marketplace, our research concluded that it is best to negotiate and define the issues, rather than assume that both buyers and sellers are interpreting the applications of copyright law in the networked environment in the same way.

Risks

While agreements may authorize certain uses and restrict others, our research indicates that both parties should be cautious in what they allow and do not allow. Buyers may find that they may be agreeing to an overly restrictive band of use, while sellers may be permitting more than is in their economic interests.

Buyers and sellers should also recognize that end-users are creative. Often, buyers are held hostage by their end-users. While sellers are learning not to blame buyers for the behavior of end-users, buyers must recognize that misuses must be addressed swiftly with the collaboration and approval of the seller. In the networked information environment, it is essential that language in agreements be developed and mechanisms remain in place to address and alleviate concerns on behalf of both parties as they arise.

---

	Developed & Maintained by: webmgr@cni.org	© 2008 Coalition for Networked Information ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Any comments, or feedback?		Last Update:   Wednesday, 03 July, 2002 - 04:22 PM - EDT