Extracted Text (may have errors)

RLI 275 ( C O N T I N U E D ) 17White Paper: US Law and International Interlibrary Loan of US law. While foreign institutions may not be bound by the same legal rules as US libraries, there are many ways a fulfilling library can be assured that its foreign partners’ requests are legitimate. Sources of assurance include shared library practices as well as formal commitments and representations from foreign partners. The proper scope and function of ILL are embedded in well-established practices that have been openly integrated into professional standards and have been widely known to and acknowledged by authors, publishers, and others for years. Grounded in practical concerns as well as respect for copyright, these practices support the use of ILL ordinarily only for materials the requesting library would not otherwise license or purchase. ILL is typically an inefficient substitute for purchase or subscription where the latter is truly justified, and to the extent that it prevents a library from acquiring relevant materials for its own collection, abuse of ILL undermines library mission. Quite simply, a high volume of ILL requests for a particular item is a reliable signal of scholarly interest that should lead a research library to acquire the item for its own collection. For these reasons, academic and research libraries that follow best practices will not engage in abuse of an ILL arrangement, regardless of variations in technical legal regimes. Fulfilling libraries also obtain assurances from international partners by formal representation. For example, most ILL request forms contain a box that requesting libraries check to indicate that their request is in compliance with US copyright law or CONTU guidelines. US libraries have no reason to believe foreign partners misrepresent themselves on these forms, which accompany each ILL request. If there is any indication of confusion, it may be helpful to explain to foreign ILL partners that US law bars domestic libraries from reproduction and lending that violates Section 108 or is not within fair use, with a clear statement that these two provisions may apply. It may also help to make the representations more explicit. For example, request forms could be changed to include verification similar to the following: This request is in compliance with US Copyright Law, including either Section 107 (fair use) or Section 108(g)(2), which provides that requests will not be made “in such aggregate quantities as to substitute for a subscription to or purchase of such work.” The requesting library represents that it complies with US law and that receiving the copy will not violate the copyright, importa- tion, or other laws of the requesting library’s country. JUNE 2011 RESEARCH LIBRARY ISSUES: A QUARTERLY REPORT FROM ARL, CNI, AND SPARC