I think we need more information here.  If what is said below is true, then
teachers should be able to make virtually unlimited copies of computer
software for educational use.  They should be able to buy one copy of a
computer program and put it on 30 computers in the same classroom.  Can
they???  Is that FAIR USE???  Doesn't sound fair to me...  Isn't that why
some software companies sell multiple copies at greatly reduced rates?

Concerning printed work:  what about a teacher buying one copy of a workbook
and copying one page a day and handing it out to her 30 students, thus
depriving the author of the sale of 30 workbooks.  Fair use?  Or, worse yet,
taking the examination copy furnished free by the publisher and making 30
copies.  Fair use?

I know the law is vague, and as a practical matter no company is likely to
challenge an individual teacher for xeroxing a workbook.  Maybe that is the
bottom line...

george

=========================

>At 10:48 AM 9/17/97 -0500, George Bauer wrote:
>
>>Fair use DOES NOT extend to making multiple copies of copyrighted materials
>>in order to avoid purching additional copies.
>>
>>Teachers and schools have felt so deprived that they think they have special
>>privileges in copying others works.  They have dont it forever; have you
>>watched them in front of the xerox machine???  And it doesn't make any
>>difference if they consider themselves good people with good motives; doing
>>it FOR THE CHILDREN.  In my opinion, it is still a violation of the
>>copyright law.
>>
>>I don't understand the IMPORTANCE issue.  Does IMPORTANCE justify what I
>>consider to be stealing the intellectual property of another???
>
>Mr. Bauer should read section 107 of the copyright act which gives the
>right of fair use to certain educational and other users of copyrighted
>intellectual property.  It is reproduced below.  The issue of IMPORTANCE
>goes to the rationale behind copyright, which exists not merely to protect
>the rights of the creator, but, rather, to advance society and
>civilization.  Creators are given rights in order to encourage the creation
>of new works, but when those rights would otherwise interfere with the
>advancement of society, or when there are important public goals which must
>be met outside of copyright, then those rights may be abridged.
>
>Those readers encountering section 107 for the first time should note that
>there are no specific rights given to education, but in determining fair
>use, the four factors listed should be considered in their totality. As a
>result determining fair use is a delicate balancing act in which each
>factor is given a specific weight in each individual situation.
>
>The current issue of Museum News contains several good articles on fair use
>in museum settings.  I recommend them.
>
>Robert Baron
>[log in to unmask]
>
>
>         SECT107. Limitations on exclusive rights: fair use
>
>
>           Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the
>     fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in
>     copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that
>     section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting,
>     teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship,
>     or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining
>     whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use
>     the factors to be considered shall include-- (1) the purpose and
>     character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial
>     nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the
>     copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion
>     used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the
>     effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the
>     copyrighted work.
>
>