Page:The librarian's copyright companion, by James S. Heller, Paul Hellyer, Benjamin J. Keele, 2012.djvu/275

Appendix M. Best Practices in Fair Use *The fair use case will be stronger when the availability of the material is appropriately publicized to scholars in the field and other persons likely to be especially interested.

FIVE: REPRODUCING MATERIAL FOR USE BY DISABLED STUDENTS, FACULTY, STAFF, AND OTHER APPROPRIATE USERS

DESCRIPTION:

Print-disabled academic and research library patrons require access to readable text in order to function as full members of an academic community; likewise, hearing disabled patrons require captioned audiovisual materials, while those with physical disabilities may require the electronic delivery of materials outside the library setting.

Relatively new electronic technologies make these kinds of accommodations possible at relatively low cost. True accommodation for these patrons means access to any materials in the library’s collection for any reason the patron may have (required reading, voluntary study, or recreation), i.e., access that is equivalent to the access afforded to students without disabilities. In addition to moral and mission-related imperatives to serve all patrons, there are also legal obligations to accommodate scholars and researchers with diverse needs. Although Section 121 of the Copyright Act authorizes the reproduction of copyrighted materials to meet these needs under some circumstances, there is continued controversy over its exact scope. Some stakeholders insist, however unreasonably, that Section 121 does not cover academic libraries’ efforts to provide accessible materials to print-disabled members of a college or university community. No specific exception to copyright even arguably addresses the needs of patrons with disabilities related to media other than print.

Making library materials accessible serves the goals of copyright, not to mention the goals of a just and inclusive society, and has no negative consequence for rights holders who have not entered the market to serve these users. Such uses add value to a work by making it available to communities that would otherwise be excluded, presenting the work in a format the rights holder has not provided and to an audience that the rights holder is not serving. Making this material available to disabled patrons, furthermore, should not penalize other potential constituents, for instance, by removing the original copy for the time that the version for the disabled is available.