Gina's example of the visiting colleague who wanted copies of the VHS tapes that would be relevant to nursing students in his country makes this question more concrete for me. Under current law, the library he was visiting could not copy the tapes for him. He would not have the money to purchase the tapes from legitimate sources; he could afford blank tapes on which to copy them.
Copyright law seems to focus on the holder's ownership of the work/product. In contrast, this example highlights the need for the information.
A parallel situation has arisen in Africa with the need for HIV/AIDS drugs. An accommodation has been made so that the drugs in that situation can be acquired for much less than in the "developed" world.
One difference between the library situation and the AIDS situation is that AIDS was solved at an institutional/international level. One decision resolved multi-country problems. The visiting colleague was trying to solve a problem that was more specific to the people whom he was working with (whether on institution or across institutions in one country). He sought an immediate solution to a pressing problem.
In this country, individuals resolve this in a variety of ways including violating copyright law. It would be interesting to know what the cultural expectations are in the colleague's culture. Is there a clash between the ownership that is paramount in the US and Canada and the possible communal ownership in his own country? Are we imposing standards by following our assumptions?
How could you find out? Are you in a position in your institution to approach someone and discuss this issue? If not you, who would be in the appropriate role?
Hi Nancy,
I'm glad you raised the example of the availability of generic, low-cost AIDS drugs for Africa. That example was also raised during our discussion at ETUG last week. I think it's an extremely pertinent example; in fact, you could argue that it is the same example. Because it's not exactly the availability of the drugs themselves that's so critical (the drugs I'm sure could be made in African laboratories too): it's the information about how to make them that's so critical. It's vital, essential medical information, & without it, people die.
You did suggest a difference between the AIDS drug problem & the problem of sharing other essential information. You suggested that the drug problem was solved at an institutional/international level. I will suggest that the AIDS drug problem was perhaps 'solved' a number of times informally, illegally, outside of the institutional/international level long before it reached global recognition.
Access to information is an essential part of access to education. I'm not saying that education is the total cure to everything -- hungry people need food first -- but education is the key to a sustainable improvement in quality of life. To my thinking, withholding information so that the rich can get richer while the poor get poorer is just plain wrong.
Gina
I'm glad you raised the example of the availability of generic, low-cost AIDS drugs for Africa. That example was also raised during our discussion at ETUG last week. I think it's an extremely pertinent example; in fact, you could argue that it is the same example. Because it's not exactly the availability of the drugs themselves that's so critical (the drugs I'm sure could be made in African laboratories too): it's the information about how to make them that's so critical. It's vital, essential medical information, & without it, people die.
You did suggest a difference between the AIDS drug problem & the problem of sharing other essential information. You suggested that the drug problem was solved at an institutional/international level. I will suggest that the AIDS drug problem was perhaps 'solved' a number of times informally, illegally, outside of the institutional/international level long before it reached global recognition.
Access to information is an essential part of access to education. I'm not saying that education is the total cure to everything -- hungry people need food first -- but education is the key to a sustainable improvement in quality of life. To my thinking, withholding information so that the rich can get richer while the poor get poorer is just plain wrong.
Gina