[LINK] RFC: Digital Heritage / Compulsory eDeposit
Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au
Tue Mar 13 15:27:10 EST 2012
A model has been proposed to extend the legal deposit obligation in
s.201 of the Copyright Act.
"The Government is seeking views on proposed changes that would
modernise the current system to extend to electronic documents by
empowering the Director-General of the National Library to request
certain electronic material to be deposited".
The Copyright Section of AG's is doing it, rather than the Office of
the Arts, and that Section has historically been extraordinarily
conservative; so some pushing is likely to be needed to get this
over the line.
It appears that this was announced on 7 March, but the only place
I've seen it was in 1 column-inch of The Canberra Times Saturday
Books column - not a place many of us can be relied on to notice it
Written submissions are required by 14 April 2012.
The AG's Media Release is here:
The AG's home-page is here:
The Consultation Paper is only 6 pp. in total, but it's in a big
"The proposed model for an extended scheme distinguishes between
offline physical format electronic publications and online electronic
publications. Essentially, the current mandatory deposit obligations
would be extended to physical format electronic publications, while
online electronic publications would be subject to a deposit on
demand basis. [CD-ROMs, DVDs]
"A reason for making a distinction between two classes of electronic
publications is that this recognises the differences between material
in a physical form and material in a virtual form and tailors the
deposit requirements accordingly. It also implements a selective
scheme for online material, recognising the large volume of material
that is potentially eligible for inclusion in the legal deposit
scheme" ... "includes: scholarly e-journals, e-magazines, ephemeral
publishing such as e-zines, online newspapers, e-books, blogs,
websites, and conference proceedings".
1. One distinction is format-based, whereas the other is content- or
market-based. Is that wise?
2. What about direct acquisition by the NLA, as Pandora does now?
Shouldn't the NLA have the capacity to download, keep and make
available; and use that as the primary mechanism, reserving
demand-based deposit where the material can't be reaped that way or
that kind of download is unsatisfactory (e.g. unduly expensive,
unduly time-consuming, results in poor quality)?
Roger Clarke http://www.rogerclarke.com/
Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd 78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 2 6288 1472, and 6288 6916
mailto:Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au http://www.xamax.com.au/
Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law University of NSW
Visiting Professor in Computer Science Australian National University
More information about the Link