Re:You can't defend public libraries and oppose file-sharing
by commentereleven on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @11:00AM
(#10191833)
He claims that these are not copyright royalties, but rather a cultural grant.
Re:You can't defend public libraries and oppose file-sharing
by dingaling on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @11:27AM
(#10192016)
Aha that helps, thank you. He's also wrong there, unfortunately.
Re:You can't defend public libraries and oppose file-sharing
by scintill76 on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @11:43AM
(#10192112)
"There are no working PLR systems yet in the United States, South America, Africa or Asia." So the existence of this system in some places doesn't itself invalidate the argument in places without that system.
Re:You can't defend public libraries and oppose file-sharing
by rbehrends on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @11:19AM
(#10191964)
It's the same in Germany, ยง27 UrhG [1].
[1] http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_urhg/englisch_urh...
"You would frequently hear that authors are paid royalties when their books are borrowed from a library. This claim is not true. "
I'm not sure what he's trying to say. In the UK, public libraries are part of the PLR scheme in which 1,000 annually-rotated libraries provide their lending details which are then scaled-up in a linear fashion and the royalties calculated on that basis.
It does mean that low-volume authors might not receive royalties one year if their loans were not sampled, but the concept is that they'd receive out-of-proportion royalties the next year when the sample set rotated.
The only reason a sample was used instead of direct measurement was due to the volume of data; automation could nowadays calculate per-author royalties on an all-branches basis.
Source: I summer-jobbed in a library back in the mid-90s and compiled the PLR statistics for the branch.
https://www.plr.uk.com/libraryInformation/sampleLibLists.htm