Recent court filings in the case of Cambridge University Press et al v. Georgia State University copyright infringement law suit offer greater specificity concerning what the publishers hope to accomplish.  As is a normal part of this kind of case, the judge asked the plaintiff—publishing companies to submit proposed language for the injunction they are asking her to issue should they win the case.  The following provides highlights summarizing the terms of their proposed injunction.

• ·         Faculty members are allowed to make copies in either an electronic or hard copy format of any work if they have permission of the copyright owner or the authorized agent of the copyright owner (e.g. Copyright Clearance Center).
• ·         Faculty members are allowed to make copies in either an electronic or hard copy format under fair use as that is defined by the March 19, 1976 “Agreement on Guidelines for Classroom Copying in Not-For-Profit Educational Institutions with Respect to Books and Periodicals.”
• ·         Only 10% of the materials used in a given course (whether assigned, required, suggested, supplemental, or otherwise) may be reproduced under the fair use rules.  In other words, 90% of the course materials must be either purchased or reproduced after obtaining permission.
• ·         Georgia State University (GSU) will develop and “promptly implement” copyright compliance training programs.
• ·         GSU will designate at least one university employee who is trained in copyright to answer compliance questions.
• ·         GSU will monitor compliance for a period of 3 years and certify its compliance to the Court.
• ·         The certification of compliance will identify all materials listed in the e-reserve system including the number of “hits” each piece received in each semester.
• ·         No more than once each semester, GSU will allow the publishers access to university computer systems (including e-reserves and the learning management system).
• ·         Electronically posted or distributed works must be accompanied by a “Faculty/Instructor Certification Concerning Electronic Course Material.”   The form, a sample version of which is included in the court filings, requires faculty members to check a box certifying that either permission was obtained (and attach a copy of the permission) or that the use is allowed under fair use.  The form must be signed and dated.
• ·         The ”Faculty/Instructor Certification Concerning Electronic Course Material” forms must be “collected by designated GSU representative before (emphasis added) copies are made or distributed and stored by GSU for at least two years.”

                While some of the proposed terms are specific to the case against GSU, others are more generalizable to all not-for-profit educational institutions.   At GSU, the publishers want extensive monitoring for a period of 3 years plus access to the computer systems so they can confirm compliance for themselves.  In the portions of the proposed injunction that lend themselves to broader application, it is clear that the publishers are hoping for a restrictive view of fair use.  Not only are they looking to turn the 1976 books and periodicals guidelines into law, they want to restrict the portion of any materials used under fair use to 10%.    Further, they are asking the court to require educational institutions to allocate on-going resources to promote and ensure copyright compliance. 

                As noted at the outset, this is the publishers’ wish list.  Undoubtedly, GSU prefers to see it as wishful thinking.