One hat or many? A comparison of two models for the Copyright Officer position in university libraries

Statute law provides university libraries with a framework for copyright requirements, duties and privileges. In Australia, there are few guidelines or standards for university libraries about providing those copyright services that are not mandated by statute, such as copyright advice and complianc...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Carson, Louise, Greenhill, Kathryn
Format: Journal Article
Published: CILIP Library & Information Research Group 2015
Online Access:http://www.lirgjournal.org.uk/lir/ojs/index.php/lir/article/view/659
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/14583
_version_ 1848748661881700352
author Carson, Louise
Greenhill, Kathryn
author_facet Carson, Louise
Greenhill, Kathryn
author_sort Carson, Louise
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Statute law provides university libraries with a framework for copyright requirements, duties and privileges. In Australia, there are few guidelines or standards for university libraries about providing those copyright services that are not mandated by statute, such as copyright advice and compliance. There is little formally-shared knowledge about the non-statutory services provided by university library Copyright Officers. More information about this would benefit libraries reviewing or establishing these positions. This research uses survey and semi-structured face-to-face interviews with designated Copyright Officers in four Western Australian universities to document four aspects of their work. These four factors are interaction and support within the library and the institution; involvement in institutional copyright advice, involvement in institutional copyright compliance; and satisfaction with authority and resourcing. The survey and interviews revealed two different models for structuring the library Copyright Officer position; one model involving a part-time officer with responsibility only for copyright, and the other model involving a full-time officer who has only 5% of their duties involved in copyright with the remainder of the copyright duties being managed by a member of the university legal / governance office. Similarities were found between the activities of both models, such as the strategies involved in ensuring copyright compliance, and education and training sessions. There was agreement from all respondents that copyright compliance within their institution could be improved by an increase in the resources available to each position.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T07:08:36Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-14583
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T07:08:36Z
publishDate 2015
publisher CILIP Library & Information Research Group
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-145832017-01-30T11:44:41Z One hat or many? A comparison of two models for the Copyright Officer position in university libraries Carson, Louise Greenhill, Kathryn Statute law provides university libraries with a framework for copyright requirements, duties and privileges. In Australia, there are few guidelines or standards for university libraries about providing those copyright services that are not mandated by statute, such as copyright advice and compliance. There is little formally-shared knowledge about the non-statutory services provided by university library Copyright Officers. More information about this would benefit libraries reviewing or establishing these positions. This research uses survey and semi-structured face-to-face interviews with designated Copyright Officers in four Western Australian universities to document four aspects of their work. These four factors are interaction and support within the library and the institution; involvement in institutional copyright advice, involvement in institutional copyright compliance; and satisfaction with authority and resourcing. The survey and interviews revealed two different models for structuring the library Copyright Officer position; one model involving a part-time officer with responsibility only for copyright, and the other model involving a full-time officer who has only 5% of their duties involved in copyright with the remainder of the copyright duties being managed by a member of the university legal / governance office. Similarities were found between the activities of both models, such as the strategies involved in ensuring copyright compliance, and education and training sessions. There was agreement from all respondents that copyright compliance within their institution could be improved by an increase in the resources available to each position. 2015 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/14583 http://www.lirgjournal.org.uk/lir/ojs/index.php/lir/article/view/659 CILIP Library & Information Research Group fulltext
spellingShingle Carson, Louise
Greenhill, Kathryn
One hat or many? A comparison of two models for the Copyright Officer position in university libraries
title One hat or many? A comparison of two models for the Copyright Officer position in university libraries
title_full One hat or many? A comparison of two models for the Copyright Officer position in university libraries
title_fullStr One hat or many? A comparison of two models for the Copyright Officer position in university libraries
title_full_unstemmed One hat or many? A comparison of two models for the Copyright Officer position in university libraries
title_short One hat or many? A comparison of two models for the Copyright Officer position in university libraries
title_sort one hat or many? a comparison of two models for the copyright officer position in university libraries
url http://www.lirgjournal.org.uk/lir/ojs/index.php/lir/article/view/659
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/14583