Watkins\u27 Patent trolls: Predatory litigation and the smothering of innovation (Book Review)

A review of Watkins, W. J., Jr. (2013). Patent trolls: Predatory litigation and the smothering of innovation. Oakland, CA: The Independent Institute. 96 pp. $17.95. ISBN 978159813170

The Georgia State University Copyright Case (Cambridge University Press v. Becker) and What It Means for Librarians

The Federal District Court in the Georgia State University copyright case (Cambridge University Press v Becker) constructed a carefully defined, but expansive Fair Use “safe harbor”. Academic libraries and not-for-profit educational institutions can use this “safe harbor” to make copies of copyright-protected materials and distribute them to students in a carefully controlled manner. The decision requires safeguards to help ensure that copies do not get disseminated beyond their intended audience. It also gives more flexibility in cases where publishers do not make smaller excerpts readily available. The Georgia State decision has been reported as allowing up to 10%,or a single chapter of a copyrighted work to be copied as “Fair Use”. This is an over-simplification of the court’s four factor “Fair Use” analysis. If one wishes to make wise, ethical decisions regarding the copying of copyrighted materials, one should have at least a general understanding of the four “Fair Use” factors and know how the court used them in the Georgia State case. The librarian community should also understand that this area of the law is still in a state of flux. This is the first case of its kind and the Publishers have appealed the decision, so it still could be modified on appeal. Other courts could also take a different approach. Still, this is a landmark case that has set a pattern that other courts are likely to follow or react against. The pattern set by this court is one that should allow librarians to act with greater confidence when making reasonable “Fair Use” decisions

The Georgia State University Copyright Case after the Appeal: Is It More Appealing?

This presentation covers the Appellate Court review of the District Court\u27s findings in the academic publishers\u27 and Copyright Clearance Center\u27s case against Georgia State University\u27s electronic reserve policies

The Georgia State University Copyright Case after the Appeal: Is It More Appealing?

This presentation covers the Appellate Court review of the District Court\u27s findings in the academic publishers\u27 and Copyright Clearance Center\u27s case against Georgia State University\u27s electronic reserve policies

A global disorder of imprinting in the human female germ line

Imprinted genes are expressed differently depending on whether they are carried by a chromosome of maternal or paternal origin. Correct imprinting is established by germline-specific modifications; failure of this process underlies several inherited human syndromes. All these imprinting control defects are cis-acting, disrupting establishment or maintenance of allele-specific epigenetic modifications across one contiguous segment of the genome. In contrast, we report here an inherited global imprinting defect. This recessive maternal-effect mutation disrupts the specification of imprints at multiple, non-contiguous loci, with the result that genes normally carrying a maternal methylation imprint assume a paternal epigenetic pattern on the maternal allele. The resulting conception is phenotypically indistinguishable from an androgenetic complete hydatidiform mole, in which abnormal extra-embryonic tissue proliferates while development of the embryo is absent or nearly so. This disorder offers a genetic route to the identification of trans-acting oocyte factors that mediate maternal imprint establishment

The Georgia State University Copyright Case (Cambridge University Press v. Becker) and What It Means for Librarians

The Federal District Court in the Georgia State University copyright case (Cambridge University Press v Becker) constructed a carefully defined, but expansive Fair Use “safe harbor”. Academic libraries and not-for-profit educational institutions can use this “safe harbor” to make copies of copyright-protected materials and distribute them to students in a carefully controlled manner. The decision requires safeguards to help ensure that copies do not get disseminated beyond their intended audience. It also gives more flexibility in cases where publishers do not make smaller excerpts readily available. The Georgia State decision has been reported as allowing up to 10%,or a single chapter of a copyrighted work to be copied as “Fair Use”. This is an over-simplification of the court’s four factor “Fair Use” analysis. If one wishes to make wise, ethical decisions regarding the copying of copyrighted materials, one should have at least a general understanding of the four “Fair Use” factors and know how the court used them in the Georgia State case. The librarian community should also understand that this area of the law is still in a state of flux. This is the first case of its kind and the Publishers have appealed the decision, so it still could be modified on appeal. Other courts could also take a different approach. Still, this is a landmark case that has set a pattern that other courts are likely to follow or react against. The pattern set by this court is one that should allow librarians to act with greater confidence when making reasonable “Fair Use” decisions

Enter the Third Dimension at Benner Library: Efficiency Strategies and Tools for Student and Faculty Researchers

Research strategies for the academic researcher using the latest library search tools

Enter the Third Dimension at Benner Library: Efficiency Strategies and Tools for Student and Faculty Researchers

Research strategies for the academic researcher using the latest library search tools