While the controversy over Access Copyright’s quest for a $45 per university student tariff - a 1,300% increase over the current basic rate - marches on in Canada, another important case is unfolding in the USA.
The US Copyright Clearance Centre (“CCC”) has started a test case against Georgia State University. Here’s an article about that case pointing out the blanket license rate in the USA for a university such as Georgia State would be $3.75 per student per year. There are no additional per page costs for course packs, etc. The only additional cost would be a one-time, first-year-only administrative charge of 20% of the total annual amount for the institution. The per student rate varies depending on the nature of the institution. However, my understanding is that the GSU rate is more or less in the middle of the range.
And yes - CCC does do transactional licenses, if the university prefers that route and does not need or want a blanket license. And many don't. More info is here.
Here’s the relevant portion of a recent article about all this by Tom Allen, who is President and CEO of the Association of American Publishers:
The US Copyright Clearance Centre (“CCC”) has started a test case against Georgia State University. Here’s an article about that case pointing out the blanket license rate in the USA for a university such as Georgia State would be $3.75 per student per year. There are no additional per page costs for course packs, etc. The only additional cost would be a one-time, first-year-only administrative charge of 20% of the total annual amount for the institution. The per student rate varies depending on the nature of the institution. However, my understanding is that the GSU rate is more or less in the middle of the range.
And yes - CCC does do transactional licenses, if the university prefers that route and does not need or want a blanket license. And many don't. More info is here.
Here’s the relevant portion of a recent article about all this by Tom Allen, who is President and CEO of the Association of American Publishers:
At trial, Tracey Armstrong, president and CEO of the Copyright Clearance Center, testified that anyone seeking to use copyrighted materials could obtain permissions on a case-by-case basis through CCC's Web site or subscribe to a "blanket license." [Editor's note: CCC is underwriting half of the publishers' legal costs in this suit.] When a university adopts CCC's blanket license, called the Annual Academic Copyright License Service, it covers all faculty, students, and others attached to the institution, including distance learners. It provides access to approximately 2.5 million titles, including books and periodicals. Prices are based on the number of students attending the institution and the proportion of those in graduate study. In combination, these two licensing services and parallel efforts by publishers are making the process of obtaining permission quite efficient.
What would be the annual cost to Georgia State University if it subscribed to a blanket Annual Academic Copyright License? The answer is $114,000 in rights-holder royalties per year plus a one-time, first-year-only administrative charge of 20% of that amount.
With an estimated 30,400 students at GSU, $114,000 works out to about $3.75 per student. About the cost of one medium-sized Starbucks drink.
So - why is AC asking for $45 per student in Canada for a license that costs about $3.75 more or less in the USA? And why will millions be spent to cut that amount more or less in half - with AUCC presumably declaring “victory”? Even if the tariff comes in at $20 per head, that’s more than five times the apparent rate in the USA.
While the details of the AC blanket license and the CCC license may differ, the overall bottom line is that a university license in the USA costs only as a small fraction of what AC is demanding. And the entire Canadian post secondary system in Canada is being put to the enormous cost and inconvenience of opposing this overreaching demand at the Copyright Board.
There are many questions that arise out of this apparently enormous overall discrepancy - but for the moment, one will suffice.
Why does such a discrepancy exist?
Posts
I think you will find that the $3.75 does not include coursepacks. There is also the lower use of coursepacks in US universities, mainly because of greater use of textbooks.
ReplyDeleteThe answer to that is:
ReplyDelete1. Canadians are too passive.
2. Canadians also have a high pain threshold.
3. Canadian Politicians have a hard time saying, "Wait a moment, why are they paying X and we're paying Y?"
To anonymous @9:42 AM:
ReplyDeleteMy specific info is that the $3.75 figure does include course packs.
If text book use is greater relative to course packs in the USA than in Canada, its likely because the market for post secondary material is more competitive and efficient, there is no tariff mechanism, and the fair use regime is fairer than AC's version of fair dealing.
You are misinformed, I'm afraid. The CCC fee is not fixed, and the actual price will depend on several variables, including the nature and extent of how the licence is used. There are also these factors to bear in mind: the CCC offers a more limited repertoire than AC, which operates on an exclusions (not an inclusions) basis; many CCC members impose restrictions on what they allow to be copied; CCC per-page pricing is usually higher than AC.
ReplyDeleteThe $45 tariff filed by AC is not the licence cost. It is an estimate of what the Board might determine based on the activity that AC believes should be licensed. The final tariff may be less. And the CCC tariff for this university will be much higher than $3.75 if they produce a substantial volume of coursepacks.
Dear Anonymous July 20 at 3:37 PM
ReplyDeleteYou have not contradicted and essentially only confirmed what I have said.
I am informed that the $3.75 per GSU FTE per year figure is mid-range in the USA for those US colleges and universities that actually take out blanket licenses. Most don’t.
According to AUCC, the average cost per FTE paid to AC per year in Canada is about $18.
So - the average blanket license reprography cost per student in Canada is already about 500% higher than the GSU rate - and will be about 1,200% higher than the GSU rate if AC gets its $45 per FTE at the Board.
As for the size of the repertoire, it’s true that AC licenses for everything is doesn’t exclude. But that doesn’t mean it has any legal basis to do so based upon any chain of title to much if not most of this so-called “repertoire”. And it can’t or won’t make available a database of its actual repertoire. This “indemnity” or “insurance” aspect raises all kinds of questions that have yet to be answered.
MAYBE YOU SHOULD LOOK AROUND A BIT FURTHER THAN US AND SEE THAT MANY COUNTRIES DO PROTECT THEIR CULTURAL INDUSTRIES AND CREATORS AND REQUEST SCHOOLS INVERSITIES AND COLLEGES TO PAY FOR THE USE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL. THE UNITED STATES ARE A GREAT COUNTRY BUT ON MANY THINGS MANY OF US WOULD NOT LIKE TO HAVE THE SAME LAWS. NOW, IS IT A QUESTION OF PRICE OR SIMPLY, AS IT APPEARS FROM AUCC AND CAUT WEBSITE, A QUESTION OF NOT PAYING AT ALL ?
ReplyDelete