LibraryLaw Blog

No news in Ann Arbor yesterday

Yes, we SHOULD have regular "no news" articles like this one in the Ann Arbor News yesterday - "No requests for library patron records at U-M." According to Barbara MacAdam (Hi Barbara!) there have not yet been any Patriot Act requests for library user records at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Since we can't report it when national security requests are made, might as well report it when they're not. Reminds me of library director Anne Turner's practice at the Santa Cruz Public Libraries:

"At each board meeting I tell them we have not been served by any (search warrants)," she said. "In any months that I don't tell them that, they'll know. "

Speaking of no-news-in-Ann-Arbor, does anyone have an update on the Maxwell lawsuit filed in June - by the patron of the Ann Arbor District Library who was banned for a year for using "obscene language" ?

Maid turned Library Assistant suffers job stress; court denies disability benefits

Mississippi State University library assistant Patricia Purnell claimed that her health deteriorated because of her transfer to a library assistant position from her previous job as a maid. The state appellate court upheld a PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM (PERS) ruling denying her PERS disability benefits because there was enough evidence in a fair hearing to support the denial.

Purnell v. Public Emples. Ret. Sys., NO. 2003-CC-00802-COA , COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI , August 31, 2004.

To see which position paid better, maid or library assistant, click below.

Practice Tip: Don't rip pages out of library books

The Hawaii Supreme Court suspended attorney William E.H. Tagupa for six months from practicing law. He had willfully torn out pages from a library's documents for personal use, and had already been suspended by the U.S. District Court for Hawaii for mutilation of the same "public property." The documents were owned by the Martin Pence Court Library. The State Court's ruling was a reciprocal discipline notice pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.15

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Tagupa, NO. 26762 , SUPREME COURT OF HAWAII , September 2, 2004

Day of silence

Law requiring ISPs to block child porn struck down today - can the Phoenix City Council decision hold up? (NO!)

More from The Volokh Conspiracy:

Pennsylvania law that requires ISPs to block alleged child porn siteshas just been struck down, both on First Amendment grounds and dormant Commerce Clause grounds. I haven't read the entire opinion, but what I have read suggests that the court's main reasons were: (1) given existing technical limitations, the law essentially pressures ISPs into blocking a lot of fully protected material as well as the unprotected child pornography; (2) the orders are issued before a full trial on the merits and are thus unconstitutional prior restraints (see the discussion of prior restraint law in this article for more); and (3) the law ended up excessively interfering not just with access to protected material by Pennsylvanians but also with such access by residents of other states, which makes the law an unconstitutional state regulation of interstate commerce (not all such state regulations are unconstitutional, but some are). The opinion is here.

A problem with library gag orders: hard to fight overly broad requests

Law Professor Eugene Volokh highlights a real problem with gag orders on librarians in his Sept. 9 draft law review article Crime Facilitating Speech:

If a librarian who is served with a subpoena can’t publicize the subpoena, and can’t explain in detail how he thinks this subpoena unnecessarily interferes with patrons’ and librarians’ privacy and freedom, then it will be more likely that such a subpoena may stand even if it’s illegal or unduly intrusive.

Continue reading "A problem with library gag orders: hard to fight overly broad requests" »

Should your libraries carry books like Hit Man? (also blog entry). Law professor Eugene Volokh analyzes Crime Facilitating Speech in a 114 page law review article (Sept 9 DRAFT). Shockingly, he footnotes one attorney's advice to a library not to order a suicide manual because of the risk of liability.

He says it's simply wrong to say that works such as Hit Man have no noncriminal value, and analyzes different (all inadequate) legal tests designed to prohibit distribution of such works -- and their unintended consequences.

It would be an easy vote to say "no porn in libraries." But mountains of documentation show that you can't screen out porn without screening out lots of sites with words like "Dick Cheney." The Supreme Court recognized that filters are far from perfect. Filters are based on keywords. Image recognition software for this still blocks out chimpanzees, babies, art etc. and is even worse than keyword software.

That's why the Supreme Court said that although it is Constitutional for Congress to require libraries to use filters (at least those libraries that get certain federal discounts and grants), the libraries must disable the filters on request by an adult patron. For more detail, see an article I wrote for First Monday.

The Phoenix City Council, however, voted to require all filters all the time. If someone has a link to the ordinance, please send it. This restrictive measure is ripe for a lawsuit. Meanwhile, I guess everyone in Phoenix will have to find full Internet access elsewhere.

See Phoenix may end up in court after banning Internet porn in libraries -news entry by Brandon Smith at Jurist.law.pitt.edu

Chris Sprigman, Jennifer Granick and Larry Lessig filed an opposition to the government’s motion to dismiss Sept. 7 on behalf of the Internet Archive and the Prelinger Archive in Kahle v. Ashcroft. This case challenges the constitutionality of Congress’s removal of copyright formalities (registration, notice, renewal) from the copyright laws.

from Chris Sprigman's Blog

I can't really get a fix on this group, Primary Research Group, but it just released a study on library licensing August 20th.

Reading it felt like sitting down to eleven cups of coffee with eleven librarians from academic and corporate libraries with strong licensing experience. Casual, honest. It did not feel like reading an $80 report that should be packed with hard data and perhaps more careful editing. (I know my blog entries would surely benefit from an editor - but hey, this blog is free).

Useful specifics are given. For example, the report tells us that Rick Burke of the Statewide California Electronic Library Consortium (SCELC) says that each of its members pays a $750.00 annual fee, and then the modest administrative apparatus is also supported by a 5% contract surcharge (only 1% if the license is arranged through another consortium). To keep costs down SCELC has avoided getting too involved in issues sometimes handled by consortiums that include union catalogs, patron initiated interlibrary loan.

I checked in with Rick since I know him and he's a great guy. He wrote back (quoted with permission):

"We want the threshold to participate in SCELC to be low, because we serve so many smaller private academic institutions that do not have large budgets. They need to add electronic resources in particular, and SCELC benefits them particularly because they are often at a disadvantage financially. At the same time, SCELC needs to be more than just a "buying club," which is why we promote other low-cost cooperative ventures to promote resource sharing, such as ILL or reciprocal borrowing. We also are exploring other means to promote continuing education and professional development for staff at our member institutions."

Does your library's collection facilitate crime? A new Hit on the Hit Man case

Should your libraries carry books like Hit Man? (also blog entry). Law professor Eugene Volokh analyzes Crime Facilitating Speech in a 114 page law review article (Sept 9 DRAFT). Shockingly, he footnotes one attorney's advice to a library not to order a suicide manual because of the risk of liability.

He says it's simply wrong to say that works such as Hit Man have no noncriminal value, and analyzes different (all inadequate) legal tests designed to prohibit distribution of such works -- and their unintended consequences.

A ripe case for a new lawsuit: Phoenix Public Library

It would be an easy vote to say "no porn in libraries." But mountains of documentation show that you can't screen out porn without screening out lots of sites with words like "Dick Cheney." The Supreme Court recognized that filters are far from perfect. Filters are based on keywords. Image recognition software for this still blocks out chimpanzees, babies, art etc. and is even worse than keyword software.

That's why the Supreme Court said that although it is Constitutional for Congress to require libraries to use filters (at least those libraries that get certain federal discounts and grants), the libraries must disable the filters on request by an adult patron. For more detail, see an article I wrote for First Monday.

The Phoenix City Council, however, voted to require all filters all the time. If someone has a link to the ordinance, please send it. This restrictive measure is ripe for a lawsuit. Meanwhile, I guess everyone in Phoenix will have to find full Internet access elsewhere.

See Phoenix may end up in court after banning Internet porn in libraries -news entry by Brandon Smith at Jurist.law.pitt.edu

Update: the Internet Archive and the Prelinger Archive file motion in Kahle case

Chris Sprigman, Jennifer Granick and Larry Lessig filed an opposition to the government’s motion to dismiss Sept. 7 on behalf of the Internet Archive and the Prelinger Archive in Kahle v. Ashcroft. This case challenges the constitutionality of Congress’s removal of copyright formalities (registration, notice, renewal) from the copyright laws.

from Chris Sprigman's Blog

How much do consortia save when negotiating library licenses?

I can't really get a fix on this group, Primary Research Group, but it just released a study on library licensing August 20th.

Reading it felt like sitting down to eleven cups of coffee with eleven librarians from academic and corporate libraries with strong licensing experience. Casual, honest. It did not feel like reading an $80 report that should be packed with hard data and perhaps more careful editing. (I know my blog entries would surely benefit from an editor - but hey, this blog is free).

Useful specifics are given. For example, the report tells us that Rick Burke of the Statewide California Electronic Library Consortium (SCELC) says that each of its members pays a $750.00 annual fee, and then the modest administrative apparatus is also supported by a 5% contract surcharge (only 1% if the license is arranged through another consortium). To keep costs down SCELC has avoided getting too involved in issues sometimes handled by consortiums that include union catalogs, patron initiated interlibrary loan.

I checked in with Rick since I know him and he's a great guy. He wrote back (quoted with permission):

"We want the threshold to participate in SCELC to be low, because we serve so many smaller private academic institutions that do not have large budgets. They need to add electronic resources in particular, and SCELC benefits them particularly because they are often at a disadvantage financially. At the same time, SCELC needs to be more than just a "buying club," which is why we promote other low-cost cooperative ventures to promote resource sharing, such as ILL or reciprocal borrowing. We also are exploring other means to promote continuing education and professional development for staff at our member institutions."