AUCC/Access Copyright Sign Model License

Posted on by
Reply

Earlier this month, Access Copyright (AC) and the Association of Colleges and Universities Canada (AUCC) reached an agreement for a model copyright license.  This model licence, which individual AUCC member institutions must choose whether to approve or not, covers the reproduction of copyrighted works on campuses across Canada.

The AUCC is an organization representing over 90 Canadian universities and colleges.  A copy of the model license can be found here.

Drawing immediate condemnation, the model license has been strongly criticised by the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS) and the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) for the high fees it imposes, the damage it could do to academic freedoms, and the potentially coercive measures it includes.  Both groups have called on institutions to reject the model license outright.

The agreement reached appears to be strikingly similar to the copyright licensing agreements signed in January by UWO and UT.  It appears to feature many of same the inherent flaws described in PLG London’s objection to Western’s copyright agreement here.  Featuring similar unjustified royalty increases, the model licence raises fees imposed on full time equivalent students to $26.00 and fails to provide little more than is already granted by existing user rights.

Replicating overbroad definitions from the UWO/UT agreement, this model license grants AC rights not set in the Copyright Act and includes posting a digital link within the definition of copy.

Featuring similar surveillance mechanisms, the model license mandates the creation of survey instruments to monitor use of copyrighted works on campuses.  While the license suggests academic freedoms will be respected, the presence of this clause is highly troublesome.  As with the UWO/UT agreement, many fear the license could require universities to monitor student and faculty email and course content.

As universities across Canada have walked away from their relationships with AC, innovative licensing alternatives to traditional copyright agreements have developed.  As we make use of fair dealing and user rights, direct site licensed material, and the increasing amount of peer reviewed open access materials available, the academic community has begun to move away from the increasingly unnecessary AC licenses.

The decision made by AUCC, UWO, and UT to reach agreements with AC significantly harms the ongoing struggle at the copyright board.

To learn more about this model licence, please visit the following blogs I consulted while researching this post:

Alan Kilpatrick
PLG (London)

Amendment to the Access Copyright Licensing Agreement at Western

Posted on by
4

An amendment to the recent Access Copyright licensing agreement sheds some light on the fee recalculation and rebate issued to Western students. Please find it here: Addendum to License Agreement letter (Jan 30)

We have been having a hard time understanding why the university was issuing rebate cheques in the face of such a large royalty increase. Initially, we explored the idea that the university may have raised the fee in anticipation of the forthcoming licensing agreement, then issued rebate cheques when the fee turned out to be lower than expected. However, it was never clear if this was actually the case.

This amendment explains that the royalties section, which increases the FTE fee to $27.50, shall be deleted from the licensing agreement and replaced with the text of this amendment in consideration of the universities willingness to settle with Access Copyright.

The amendment states that the royalty for the period from January 2011 to April 2011, and thru to April 30 2012, shall be calculated at the much lower rate of the previous agreement rather than $27.50. The previous licensing agreement rate was $3.38 per FTE and 10 cents per page for course packs. This seems to indicate why rebates were issued by the university.

While the licensing agreement and this amendment are publicly available from the Copyright Board, the university choose not to release them at any point. Western’s failure to make this information available to the larger university community is troubling and seems to suggest some deceptiveness on the part of the university.

 
Alan Kilpatrick

PLG London

Objection to the Access Copyright Licensing Agreement at the University of Western Ontario

Posted on by
2

Objection to the Access Copyright Licensing Agreement at the University of Western Ontario – Progressive Librarians Guild (London Chapter) – March 7, 2012

On January 30, 2012 the University of Western Ontario and Access Copyright, Canada’s Copyright Licensing Agency, reached a licensing agreement on the reproduction of copyrighted works on campus that increases the annual fee per full time equivalent (FTE) student to $27.50.

The agreement was made retroactive to January 1, 2011, which is why Western students recently received “rebate” cheques that represented the difference between the $27.50 fee and the higher fee the university put in place last year.

Unjustified and burdensome, the university has passed this excessive increase onto students with no real consultation, discussion, or approval from the Western student body.

Fundamentally flawed, the licensing agreement features broad definitions of key terms and gives Access Copyright rights that do not exist under Canada’s Copyright Act. The agreement expands the definition of “copy” to include posting a link to a digital copy, a definition not set out or supported by the Copyright Act or court decisions interpreting the act.

An intrusive invasion of privacy, the agreement violates academic freedom and may have serious negative consequences for the students, faculty, and librarians of Western.  The licensing agreement mandates the creation of survey instruments to monitor the volume of copyrighted works in use. With the expanded definition of “copy” and the reference to e-mail in the definition of “course collection”, the agreement could require the university to monitor students, faculty, and librarians and their e-mail accounts and course content for use of copyrighted materials.

As the rising number of colleges and universities opting out of continued arrangements with Access Copyright understand, Access Copyright licensing agreements have become increasingly unnecessary. The rights granted are limited and do not go beyond established user rights like fair dealing. As fair dealing has been strengthened, the academic community has begun to move away from traditional licensing agreements like Access Copyright.

Over thirty Canadian universities have elected to opt-out from dealing with Access Copyright and are actively exploring alternatives to the license.  Modern and innovative alternatives include making better use of the fair dealing rights under existing copyright law, expanding access to direct site-licensed material through Western Libraries, and increasing use of open access materials.

Western’s decision to sign the agreement is poorly timed.  Pending amendments to the Copyright Act in Parliament and decisions from the Supreme Court may clarify and expand user rights for Canadian universities.

The Progressive Librarians Guild (London Chapter) supports the move to reject Access Copyright and this agreement. Unfortunately, the University of Western Ontario’s decision to enter the agreement has significantly undermined the continuing efforts of colleges and universities across Canada to oppose the proposed tariff at the Copyright Board.

The Progressive Librarians Guild condemns the Access Copyright licensing agreement and urges the University of Western Ontario to cancel the agreement.

Alan Kilpatrick

Progressive Librarians Guild (London Chapter)

A copy of the licensing agreement between Access Copyright and the University of Western Ontario can be found here: AC-UWO, Addendum to License Agreement letter (Jan 30)