Author Archives: camillefrancoise

Use of Works in Teaching Activities – Article 5 of the EU-DSM directive by Soile Manninen

Soile Manninen is an Information Specialist at Helsinki University Library (Finland) and a member of the working group on legal issues of The Finnish Research Library Association. The mission of the group is to track legislation concerning libraries, and keep Association members up to date about these issues.

Can you explain to us what article 5 of the EU-DSM Directive contains?

This new mandatory educational exception/limitation allows the digital use of works and other subject matter for the purpose of illustration for non-commercial teaching for cross-border uses. “Use of works” covers reproduction (scanning, printing, copying, uploading, downloading, making screenshots, etc.), communication to the public, and making available to the public. “Non-commercial teaching” refers to the nature of the teaching, not the organizational or funding background of the educational establishment.

The responsibility belongs to the educational establishment. Teaching should happen on its premises or at other venues (e.g. libraries, museums), or through a secure electronic environment that is only available for the pupils or students and teaching staff educational establishment. Cross-border teaching follows the legislation of that country where the educational organisation is established. During teaching activities, it is always required to indicate the source and give the author’s name, unless this turns out to be impossible.

Member States may provide that this exception or limitation adopted does not cover specific uses or types of works, e.g. materials that are intended for the educational market or if licenses are easily available. If Member State supports a license-based solution, it has to ensure that these licenses are available and visible in an appropriate manner, and there shouldn’t be any administrative burden to educational establishments. Member States should clarify those situations where this exception or limitation is applicable and when uses require a license. Member States can decide in favor of fair compensation for the right holders for the use of their works.

Some EU countries have already implemented allowed educational exceptions or limitations based on InfoSoc Directive (2001/29/EC) and Database Directive (96/9/EC) but the legislation still differs between Member States so there is demand for common ground to take care digital teaching cross-border activities.

Why is this provision important for libraries?

Libraries support education and are educators. In higher education or school environment the connection between library and education is easy to see because libraries take care of material acquisition and agreements with service providers, but how does this work in public libraries or special libraries? Public libraries are one of the key information resources for education at every level, most importantly for students at primary and secondary levels, and of course, every self-motivated citizen who takes part in non-formal training activities.

It should be pointed out that this exception cannot be overridden by contract but there might be some things to follow when libraries negotiate with service providers. What kind of clauses we have to consider and does this have some effects on the prices of information resources when the potential amount of users is going to bigger? If Member State decide in favor of fair compensation for right holders, how is it organized and who pays all this?

What is the best implementation libraries could hope for with this article?

Libraries and cultural heritage institutions should be mentioned as educational establishments so there will not be any confusion that libraries can carry out educational activities.

Article 5 concerns digital uses, and it does not say anything about printed material, but digitization is allowed. This exception/limitation allows using part of the work and Member States can decide on what extent works can be used. Hopefully, there won’t be specific quantitative measures because those numbers treat different types of works unequally (there is a difference are you using 20% of novel or photo).

In those countries where licensing is the option, there should be clear guidance and awareness of how materials can be used and the compensation system should be transparent for all sides. Based on Article 25 of the DSM Directive it is possible to adopt wider exceptions and maintain possibilities that InfoSoc Directive already offered. If there are exceptions/limitations that have been regulated earlier and they have proven to be functional, there isn’t any reason to make these any worse.

What is your government’s position on the issue?

Implementing the DSM Directive in the Finnish government belongs to the Ministry of Education and Culture. In May 2019 the Ministry started to organize open workshops and discussions where stakeholders worked together to understand what the DSM Directive means and which is the best way to implement the new Directive into our legislation.

Discussion around Article 5 has been quiet. Finland and other Nordic countries have active collective management organisations (CMOs) which represent authors, performers, and publishers, and extended collective licensing (ECL) is not new to us. It seems that copyright societies are now seeking new licensing solutions, and this gets support from the DSM Directive’s Article 12 “Collective licensing with an extended effect”.

Moving towards license-based solutions seems to be the worst-case scenario for many Member States where this kind of arrangement is not common but the license-based solution is reality in some countries. The Finnish National Agency for Education takes care of licensing negotiations with CMOs for primary and second-degree education and the costs of licenses are paid from the national budget. Higher education institutions have to pay these licenses from their budgets. This is how teachers, pupils, and students can use printed and digital material and copyright holders get their compensation of the use.

In Finland, education is public (in copyright language: communication to the public). Teachers make most of the education materials themselves and the basic rule is that they hold the copyright for their material. According to the recent copyright study published by the Center for Cultural Policy Research (2019), the main issue of the primary and second-degree education is the lack of digital material that can be modified, further developed and combined.

It is not always clear when uses fall under copyright law, licenses, or when there is a need to get separate permission from the copyright holder (e.g. using audiovisual material) and these issues arise daily while using digital platforms. Libraries have been actively promoting Open Educational Resources (OER), consulting about copyright and Creative Commons licenses and this work continues.

#1Lib1Ref – Interview with Roy Cohen from the Elyachar Central Library in Israel

During the second campaign of # 1Lib1Ref 2020, libraries invested themselves all over the world! Roy Cohen is head of cataloguing and classification department at the Elyachar central library in Israel, and unveils the first launch of the campaign in his institution!

1. Could you please tell us a little bit about your institution and yourself? What is your experience with Wikipedia?

The Technion (officially: Technion – Israel Institute of Technology) is one of 9 universities in Israel, that specializes in the exact sciences and engineering, and related fields such as architecture, medicine, industrial management, and education.

The Technion library system is made of the Elyachar Central Library and research libraries that are located in the faculties. The Central Library determines policies and guidelines and provides services for all the Technion libraries, including the library operating systems, the libraries’ web portal, acquisitions, cataloguing, and interlibrary loans. The faculty research libraries’ aim is to focus on the information needs of their students and academic staff.

I am the head of the cataloguing department in the Elyachar Central Library for almost 7 years now and have been written and updated a few articles in Wikipedia in the last 10 years, both in Hebrew and English. I would say that my knowledge of editing Wikipedia articles in intermediate.

2. For how long has the Elyachar central library been involved in the # 1Lib1Ref campaign, what is the angle of contribution of your institution and why?

This is the first time we are involved in the campaign. I have decided to add references to Hebrew articles on Technion academic personnel.

3. What is your or your library’s intention to carry on with the project in the future?

We are setting up a workshop that is aimed to provide the elementary editing tools in Wikipedia for those who do not have any notion on how the editing process works. The workshop will be carried out by me. By doing so we hope to recruit some Technion staff that will be involved in future campaigns as such.

4. What would you recommend to university libraries or those linked to technological institutes to identify relevant contributions to make or first steps to invest in #1Lib1Ref?

If a university library or any other institution would like to join the campaign they should identify persons who already know how to create and edit articles on Wikipedia so that they would join the campaign and perhaps teach others how to edit.

Contract Override and Technological Protection Measures – Article 7 by Benjamin White

Benjamin White is researcher at the University of Bournemouth (UK).

Common provisions

“Any contractual provision contrary to the exceptions provided for in Articles 3, 5 and 6 shall be unenforceable.”

“Article 5(5) of Directive 2001/29/EC shall apply to the exceptions and limitations provided for under this Title. The first, third and fifth subparagraphs of Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC shall apply to Articles 3 to 6 of this Directive.”

  1. Can you explain to us what article 7 of the EU-DSM Directive contains?

Although one of the least obtrusive articles in the EU-DSM Directive, Article 7 structurally performs a vital role.

Article 7(1)  ensures that text and data mining for research purposes, preservation and any member state exceptions relating to education that fall under the new Directive cannot be removed by licence or contracts. Essentially these three categories of limitations and exceptions one could argue have become more than mere defences against claims of copyright infringement, but have now become “user rights” in European law.

Article 7(2) deals with an existing anomaly in the 2001 European Copyright Directive. Before this amendment EU governments were only able to require rightsholders to give access to digital content users were locked out from, if the digital content was either off-line (e.g. CD-Roms), or if online, not subject to any terms and conditions. Given that most digital content these days is online and comes with terms and conditions this provision created a position in law where governments were not able to force rightsholders to give access to the vast majority of digital content available to researchers and consumers.

As a result of this amendment  however, governments will now have the ability to require rightsholders to give access to online digital content subject to terms and conditions. It applies to both text and data mining exceptions, preservation and any member state exceptions relating to education that fall under the new Directive.

Whilst a step forward Article 7 is perhaps unclear in regards to some of the exceptions. For example, how does non-contractual override of Article 5 work, if member states allow activities undertaken in educational establishments to be regulated by licences and not by exceptions? Similarly it is hard to see what difference it will make under the commercial data mining exception (Article 4), given that the Article itself allows rightsholders to opt out using technical means, preventing their works being used under the exception.

  1. Why is this provision necessary to libraries?

These provisions are vitally important for libraries. Libraries have been asking for decades for governments to protect the public interest activities of libraries and educational establishments from technical and contractual override for decades. Essentially without this, in a digital world where contracts and technical protection measures (TPMs) are ubiquitous, access to content for preservation, data mining, teaching etc cannot be guaranteed.

Article 7.1 is necessary because other than in a handful of European countries, licences offered to libraries can and do routinely remove limitations and exceptions provided for in copyright law. In many countries the kinds of defences available to consumers in regards to unfair contract terms, are simply not available to institutions like libraries and universities.

In terms of technical protection measures blocking access 31.2% of teachers and 36.9% of learners said they were not able to access or use TPM-protected works in a study commissioned by the European Union. The process to request to government access when access to digital content is blocked is also very unclear in most countries. Where it is clear the process of engaging with government has also proven to be very slow. (see section three below.)

Without addressing these issues intelligently, it also brings into question the very function of government in regards to maintaining the important balance in copyright law that supports new innovation and learning through limitations and exceptions. If limitations and exceptions can simply be removed by rightsholders through contracts or technical measures, what is the function of the legislature in supporting the public interest through copyright law?

  1. What is the best implementation Libraries could hope for with this article?

The best implementation of Article 7 would be for member states to apply the principles of non-contractual and non-technical override of limitations and exceptions to all exceptions – as a minimum those that relate to libraries, education, research etc.

Countries like the UK, Ireland, Portugal and Belgium already have provisions that prevent contracts removing many public interest exceptions in copyright law.

I believe it is very important that librarians in all European countries use the implementation of the EU-DSM Directive to push for the non-overridability of exceptions by contracts and technical protection measures

It is also vitally important that the existing governmental process for circumvention of technical protection measures is improved. It should be clear, transparent, and give access to digital content quickly. In the UK it took half a year from start to finish for a researcher to get some kind of resolution when locked out from digital content they were wishing to data mine. This is why organisations such as the European Research Library Association (LIBER) and Communia are calling for access to be given within 72 hours of the government being made aware of the blockage.

  1. You followed the implementations in Europe in particular on this article, what are the different positions proposed by the governments?

I am not aware of how this technical provision has been introduced in the countries where drafts are available (Belgium, Germany, Croatia and Hungary) but would love to know!

Opening of digital reproductions of collections for commercial use, an interview with José Luis Bueren Gómez-Acebo, deputy director of the national library of Spain

At the end of April 2020, the National Library of Spain announced that it will allow free commercial use of its digital images. IFLA is delighted to welcome deputy-director of this institution, José Luis Bueren Gómez-Acebo, to tell us more about this new project!

Could you please tell us about your institution and its work with digital collections?

The National Library of Spain (BNE), as many other libraries, has been working with digital collections from the beginning of the 21st century. In 2008 we launched our Biblioteca Digital Hispánica, as a single access point to our digital collections (10.000 titles at that time) and we started several digitization projects. Since then, we have been developing different strategies to promote the use and reuse of these collections. Social media, interactive books, digital exhibitions… In 2017 we made public BNELab to put together some of these initiatives and to develop, around this laboratory, different projects in order to promote reuse. We have published all our metadata in open standards, we have developed a linked open data catalog (datos.bne.es), we have also launched a crowdsourcing platform (Comunidad BNE) a project dedicated to the young students (BNEscolar) and published around one thousand public domain books in epub, free of charge.

To draw the hole picture of our digital collections I should also mention that in these years we have also started to preserve born digital collections. We are already keeping part of the “.es” domain and thousands of digital publications.

The announcement of the decision to open these collections for commercial purposes was very positively received by the OpenGLAM community, could you explain the context of this decision and what are the reasons that led you to develop this project?

As I have just summarized, in the BNE we have been making great efforts to digitize and promote use and reuse of our collections. In the past years we had taken several decisions to facilitate use and reuse of our collections (making easier and cheaper the obtention of images and public use) with very good results in terms of use of our collections. The possibility of allowing commercial use has been under discussion all this time but it is not a minor questions as there are some important issues involved. In the current context of the COVID-19 pandemic we have finally thought that this measure could be a way to help cultural industries to develop new projects or, if not new, to low a barrier to some more “traditional” such as facsimiles editions.

This announcement made, your institution and your teams commit to implementing this policy, what would be the first steps ?

There is a bureaucratic process until the decision is finally official and after that there is not really much work to do (apart from changing watermarks or the information in our website). Indeed, not charging any use simplifies our procedures as we don’t need to process these requests. Beyond this, we would like to deepen the reuse strategy by approaching new users communities. In the medium term we would like to be able to offer directly in our digital library the high resolution images (right now the user needs to request it to the library and, although public use will be free we need to charge a small amount for the image supply). This does not apply to the images available in our digital library: they can be freely downloaded and used.

What would you recommend to small or medium-sized libraries who would also like to get involved in this type of project?

I am very cautious giving advice as each institution has its own context. In general I would encourage them to make a decided commitment with the promotion of use and reuse.

In my view, this vision leads quite naturally to a process of opening licences. But I also think this has to be done not just as a fad but as a serious internal strategy in which not only digital collections but all the activities of the library has to be involved.

 

Preservation of Heritage: Article 6 of the EU-DSM by Renata Petrušić

Renata Petrušić, senior librarian at the Croatian Digital Library Development Centre of the Croatian Institute for Librarianship, National and University Library in Zagreb. Responsible for copyright and licencing issues, access and rights management.

1. Can you explain to us what article 6 of the EU-DSM Directive contains?

Article 6 refers to the preservation of cultural heritage. It contains a mandatory exception that allows cultural heritage institutions to make, in any format or medium, preservation copies of all works that they have permanently in their collections.

Recitals 25-29 of the EU-DSM Directive provide details of the scope and objective of Article 6. They state that, in order to achieve preservation goals, cultural heritage institution are allowed to establish cross-border preservation networks, enabling cross-border cooperation and sharing of means of preservation. Recital 29 provides a broad definition of works that are considered to be permanently in the collection of a cultural heritage institution, including works that are “result of a transfer of ownership or a licence agreement, legal deposit obligations or permanent custody arrangements”. In addition, Article 7 stipulates that contractual provision contrary to the exceptions are unenforceable and that technological protection measures should not prevent the creation of preservation copies.

2. Why is this provision important to libraries?

Ensuring the preservation and accessibility of works from their collections for this and future generations have always been the fundamental mission of libraries. In order to achieve this mission, libraries and other cultural heritage institutions need a clear legal framework adapted to the digital age. It is essential to have legislation that allows libraries to take all necessary steps in order to carry out their duties and fulfil a public purpose.

Given that under copyright law, authors have the exclusive right of reproduction, it is crucial to have an exemption to copyright protection which allows libraries to make preservation copies of works without the need to seek permission from the copyright holder. Such an exemption must apply to all types of works or another subject-matter that libraries own or permanently have in their collections, to all formats and media. It is particularly important to emphasize that technical protection measures and contractual provisions must not affect the possibility of making preservation copies.

Although most European countries already have legal provisions that allow acts of reproduction for preservation incorporated in their national laws, inconsistency in the current legal provisions of  EU Member States brings legal uncertainty to preservation efforts carried out by cultural heritage institutions and their partners. Not all libraries have the technical resources and required expertise to carry out preservation programmes and they in that regard need to rely on external contractors and partners. The new mandatory exception will harmonize this exception across the EU, allowing libraries to cooperate across borders, use preservation networks and work with third parties when making preservation copies.

3. What is the best implementation Libraries could hope for with this article?

The provisions of Article 6 are a welcome addition to European legislation ensuring the improvement and harmonisation of exceptions relating to the preservation of cultural heritage throughout the EU. The adoption of the provisions of Article 6 and the definitions in the Recitals as they are set out in the Directive, would ensure that libraries are allowed to:

– make preservation copies of all the works from their collections (by the appropriate preservation tool, means or technology, in any format or medium, in the required number, at any point in the life of a work),

– cooperate cross-border,

– share the means of preservation,

– rely on third parties for the making of copies,

– establish cross-border preservation networks,

– make sure that contractual provisions and technological protection measures do not prevent preservation of works.

However, it is possible to go beyond what is set out in the Directive. Ideally, broader exceptions would include permission to make copies of works for all internal uses in libraries, such as indexing and cataloguing, and other activities necessary for management of collection.

4. What is your government’s position on the issue?

Croatia is one of the first EU Member States to introduce a proposal of the transposition of the EU-DSM Directive into national law. A public consultation on the Draft Proposal on Copyright and Related Rights Act was conducted from April to May 2020. The proposed Bill received more than 730 comments. The government is now in the process of preparing a report on the consultation.

The current Croatian Copyright and Related Rights Act includes an exception benefiting cultural heritage institutions to reproduce copyrighted works from their own copy to any media for the purposes of preservation and safeguarding.

The new proposal of the Croatian Copyright and Related Rights Act implements the provisions of Article 6 as they are prescribed by the Directive. Article 182 of the proposed Croatian Copyright Law closely follows the wording of  Article 6, stating that “cultural heritage institutions […] are authorized, without the approval of the right holder and without payment of remuneration, to reproduce copyrighted works and related rights that are a permanent part of their collections, in any format or on any medium, for the purpose of their preservation and to the extent necessary for that purpose”. The same article also states that contractual provisions that are contrary to this exception are null and void, and defines the types of works that are considered to be part of the collections of cultural heritage institutions (as they are defined in Recital 29 of the Directive).

Importantly, proposed Croatian Law has retained the provisions of the current law that go beyond what is allowed in Article 6 of the Directive. Article 184 of the proposed Croatian Law, which refers to exceptions of the reproduction rights, for benefit of particular institutions, states that cultural heritage institutions “may, without the authorisation of the right holder and without payment of remuneration, reproduce a copyrighted work or another subject-matter […], on any medium, for their special needs that are in accordance with their public purposes, such as the needs of preservation and safeguarding of the materials, technical restoration and reparation of the materials, collection management and other own needs, if not acquiring thereby any direct or indirect commercial benefit”.

 

 

 

Text and Data Mining: (Articles 3 and 4 of the EU-DSM) by REBIUN’s Copyright working group

The Copyright working group of REBIUN (the network of university libraries in Spain) is formed of Silvia Losa, as coordinator of the group, and librarian in the Universitat Pompeu Fabra in Barcelona, Paloma Jarque, librarian in the Universidad Carlos III in Madrid, Rosa Mª Sánchez, librarian in UNED, and Patricia Sanpera, librarian in the Ilustre Colegio de la Abogacía de Barcelona. The group studies topics of interest on copyright for university libraries in Spain. We are currently monitoring the transposition process to guide REBIUN in the actions to be carried out in order to get legislation in line with the interests of libraries.

  1. Can you explain to us what Articles 3-4 of the EU-DSM Directive are?

Articles 3-4 of the DSM Directive introduce two exceptions to copyright for text and data mining.

Text and data mining (TDM) is defined as “any automated analytical technique aimed at analysing text and data in digital form in order to generate information which includes but is not limited to patterns, trends and correlations”.

Article 3 focuses on text and data mining for the purposes of scientific research.

The article covers the reproduction, and extraction from databases, made by research organisations and cultural heritage institutions (and their members) but only for scientific research purposes. It also covers the storage and retention of copies, for the same purposes, including the verification of research results.

A cultural heritage institution includes “publicly accessible library or museum, an archive or a film or audio heritage institution”. Art. 2(3)

Research organisations are basically not-for-profit entities or entities tasked by a Member State with a public service research mission, according to art. 2(1).

The exception covers text and data mining of “works or other subject matter to which they have lawful access”. That means all the collections of institutions like libraries but also those contents freely available online.

This exception is not subject to remuneration (recital no. 17) and is protected against contract override. Art. 7(1)

Rightholders may establish measures to ensure the security of their systems but they should not prevent the application of the exception. Copies generated by text and data mining should be stored securely. Member States may regulate both aspects after negotiation with stakeholders (including, therefore, libraries).

 

Article 4 allows acts of “reproductions and extractions of lawfully accessible works and other subject matter for the purposes of text and data mining”.

Text and data mining can be done for any purpose and the reproductions “may be retained as long as necessary for the purposes of text and data mining.” Art. 4(2)

The exception benefits all kind of users, institutions or individuals, who have lawful access to contents. That means all the collections of the organisation but also the open web.

This exception, unlike the previous one, can be overridden by contract.

According to art. 4(3) “the exception or limitation shall apply on condition that the use of works […] has not been expressly reserved by their rightholders in an appropriate manner, such as machine-readable means in the case of content made publicly available online”.

 

  1. Why are these items important to libraries?

An exception for ‘text and data mining’, TDM, as stated in articles 3 and 4 of the EU-DSM Directive, grants libraries the right to mine in copyright works to which they have lawful access.

Text and data mining, TDM, is important for research and academic libraries because this exception allows them to support researchers and other legitimate users from different disciplines to undertake data mining. This support includes giving them access to legally accessed materials, not only on-site but remotely, and with the right to keep secure copies.

There are some aspects of the activity of libraries that can be closely related to text and data mining.

Libraries are supporters of Open Science, as they do with their institutional repositories. Open Science, including, inter alia, open access, open data, and FAIR data, is a loyal friend for TDM. With such a friend, researchers and other legitimate users will successfully carry out automated text and data analysis. Open Science is based on the possibility of checking out researchers’ methods and data. Without the opportunity to look at the datasets used for analysis, other researchers cannot confirm, or disapprove, findings, undermining overall scientific progress.

Libraries are used to work together with IT and Legal Departments. For the sake of an ideal use of the exception in favour of researchers and other legitimate users, libraries can help TDM workflows and infrastructures to be applied and developed.

As beneficiaries of the exception, and as advocates of researchers and other legitimate users from their institutions, libraries can have the necessary power when negotiating with publishers, so the right to mine is not overridden by contracts, and no additional information about the research is requested by publishers. And, as well, ensuring that any technical issues or access-blocking experienced by the institution are resolved quickly. Libraries pay for subscriptions to academic publications, there is no need to pay again to text and data mine contents already subscribed.

Furthermore, with a TDM exception libraries could, in short terms:

–       Perform TDM without requirement to inform or seek permission from publishers

–       Remove or ignore contractual provisions in licenses in conflict with TDM

–       Promote actions (including legal action) if access is blocked and not quickly resolved by the publisher

–       Protect personal data and privacy of researchers and other legitimate users from publisher requests for further information about TDM activities

 

  1. What is the best implementation you could hope for with these articles?

In short, our aspiration would be that the legal text allows the maximum use of text and data mining techniques for research purposes, and also to the legitimate users; with the only limitation that such uses do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the works and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholders.

Specifically, we believe that there are a number of issues that it is important to incorporate or clarify in the law:

Data mining exception should allow acts affecting the right of transformation. It is not always clear when the use of these techniques can affect this right, so the express inclusion of this right would create legal certainty for researchers and legitimate users.

Public communication should also be allowed to enable researchers to carry out text and data mining activities where they have better tools for this, through a remote controlled system. That would prevent them from having to move, for example, to library facilities in order to analyse digitisations of their collections.

It should also ensure that the application of the exception entails the possibility of disseminating the results generated by it provided that such dissemination does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.

With regard to libraries and other cultural heritage institutions, the law should specify that they may use the exception of article 3 to conduct research in the context of their main activities. A restrictive interpretation of the concept of scientific research will make the exception useless for our institutions.

The storage of copies generated by the mining of text and data should be made where the researcher or the legitimate users choose, provided that they are protected against unauthorized access. Moreover, imposing different storage conditions in each European country may be an impediment to the development of cross-border projects.

It must be ensured also that, in the case of technological protection measures, the beneficiaries of the exception may have an extraordinary remedy requiring rightholders, or their intermediaries, to lift such mechanisms within a maximum of 72 hours, including financial penalties in case of non-compliance, where appropriate.

Since the exception (both exceptions of article 3 and 4) should not be subject to fair compensation, it should be ensured that suppliers of works and services do not impose a higher price on their subscription to enable text and data mining activities.

Finally, regarding specifically article 4, and according to the EU-DSM Directive, the law should also ensure that in cases of accessible resources that have been made publicly available online, rightholders can only object to the exception through the use of machine-readable means; otherwise the exception will become useless, as a manual review of terms of use and legal notices of websites cannot be intended.

  1. What is your government’s position on the issue?

We have no information about this aspect at the moment. The government launched a public consultation on December 2019 but they did not expose any kind of explanation or clarification on the positions of the government regarding the transposition of the EU-DSM. As far as we know (https://www.notion.so/Spain-64ff430a3fec4ed2a17895bd82ceb6e8), they will probably publish a draft of the legislative text when the State of Alarm ends.

 

#1Lib1Ref from the 15th May to the 5th of June

From 15th May to 5th June, IFLA continues its support of the #1Lib1Ref campaign (1 Librarian, 1 Reference)

What is #1Lib1Ref?
#1Lib1Ref is an event launched by the Wikimedia Foundation and which aims to invite librarians around the world to add sources to Wikipedia! IFLA is delighted to promote and support libraries’ efforts to get involved in this campaign.

Why add sources to Wikipedia?

Wikipedia is one of the most popular educational and information sites worldwide. People use Wikipedia to find information, whether it is the general public, students, researchers or librarians. As a free resource, it can be, for many, a vital – or even the only – reference they have on an issue.

Improving the quality of articles on Wikipedia means both fighting false information, detecting and structuring information, and promoting knowledge of important sources in relevant fields.

Why do libraries around the world have a role to play?

Wikipedia has a very precise policy on the reliability of sources! Each piece of information added in Wikipedia should be backed up by secondary sources, either a book or two articles.
Libraries collectively hold a wealth of documents which can be extremely valuable documentary sources for Wikipedia. Each book and article ever published is a potential goldmine of references.
Several themes dear to libraries are at the core of this project: combating misinformation; access to information and knowledge; and the development of resources and spaces for learning that complement the work of libraries themselves.

In addition, it is valuable for libraries to engage in each country because each nation, each community has its history, its perspective on its history and the sources attached to it.

In order to have a better representation on Wikipedia, it is necessary to bring together different visions and sources so that citizens can build a balanced opinion.

How to participate?

#1Lib1Ref is an initiative which aims to invite librarians to contribute to Wikipedia, and provide an opportunity to think about how to integrate this as a new way of delivering on the mission of libraries to provide equitable and universal access to information.

Everyone can adapt this initiative according to what they consider relevant.

There are libraries contributing to the addition of references on Wikidata rather than on Wikipedia. Some libraries organise national contests between library institutions to find out who will contribute the most and others hold workshops with their audiences to teach them how to contribute and add sources on Wikipedia.

If you want more information, you can check this page: here.