No, not when there are only a few copies in a couple of libraries .. .
A California appellate court recently reversed a ruling against Rabbi Pinchas Lipner and the Hebrew Academy of San Francisco, saying that his defamation action was not barred by the state’s one year statute of limitations. Why? Because the alleged libel was “hidden or beyond what the ordinary person could be expected to immediately detect or comprehend.”
The court looked at the number of copies available, noting three copies at the Bancroft, one at the Charles E. Young Research Library at UCLA, two copies at the New York Public Library, two at the Magnus Museum in Berkeley and one at Temple Emanu-El in San Francisco.
Although the Bancroft Library made copies of the oral history "available" to other libraries, the record established that only two, the New York Public Library and the Charles E. Young Research Library at UCLA, ever requested or were actually provided a copy.
The record did not indicate whether the New York Public Library made the document generally available to the public or whether any user of that library ever requested a copy. The Charles E. Young Research Library is not unrestrictedly open to the general public, but primarily serves the research needs of faculty and graduate students. Hebrew Academy of San Francisco et al, v. Richard N. Goldman, 2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 765 (May 12, 2005) PDF or DOC