Um...I'm requesting permission cause I'm a nerd?

April 30, 2007 12:03 PM

How easy/impossible is it to obtain copyright permissions from a literary agency for "individual use" of their materials?

I am interested in obtaining reproductions of letters and manuscripts from the collection of Don DeLillo's papers at the University of Texas at Austin Ransom Research Center. I've read the procedure for obtaining copies of these materials on their website and been in contact with one of the librarians by e-mail who have directed me to obtain permission from two literary agencies in London (The Wylie Agency and A.M. Heath) for materials under their copyright. My question is, do such agencies grant requests to individuals like myself who are interested in this material purely for it's own sake and are not professionals preparing work that quotes from or otherwise reproduces the material? Is it even worth it for me to send them an application with the requisite fees or are they likely to see that I have no credentials and reply with a form letter "regretfully informing" me that they do not grant permission?

posted by inoculatedcities to writing & language (6 comments total)

I think a major concern of these agencies is to prevent misuse of copyrighted materials, or use that is not paid for and should be. If you present your case well, why should they not look favourably upon it? You draw a line between yourself and a 'professional', but they may draw a different line; and wisdom suggests they have nothing to gain, and conceivably something to lose, by not dealing with your request seriously.
posted by londongeezer at 12:59 PM on April 30, 2007

Geughh...

Well, I guess my question is whether you plan on holding these reproductions for personal reasons ONLY, or if you plan on using them for any research/educational purposes? If you're currently a student and plan to use them in a research project, you're entitled to a fair use exception and don't have to worry with gathering permission.

"Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered “fair,” such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research."

That article goes on to let you know what factors a court would use to determine if you're usage (in another way) would constitute "fair use."

If you wish to obtain a copyright simply for your private usage and reference...then the librarians are probably right. While most libraries don't have any issue giving out Xerox copies of most stuff, I'd imagine they also are very attuned to copyright issues and people who are known throughout the business as being asshat-y about enforcing their rights. These librarians may be requiring you to get clearance to cover both your and their asses from lawsuits. They have the technical letter of the law on their side, and would probably win if you couldn't show an educational or critical usage of the work.

As for how to aks for these permissions, I've found in the few situations where I've had to clear copyrights for people (like my wife a few days ago), it depends on the size and potential bureaucracy. If these are smaller agencies, then it may not be all that hard. If you were trying to get, say, Capitol Records or Simon and Schuster to give you these rights...you'd might as well just give up now.

In your specific situation, I'd simply send an email to the general question email address on the linked website above, requesting information on acquiring a license (don't specify which kind), and then get into the specifics of the type of license (non-exclusive, non-commercial personally-held single reproduction) you want. If you cannot find a website, try to get a phone number, call and ask for the correspondence address of either general correspondence or the licensing department. If you get the licensing department address, simply skip directly to the license and pricing request recommendations above.

To sum up, it is worth your time - the emails are free, and the cost of letter and your time is negligible. It is worth a shot, and has (I'd imagine) a 50/50 shot of working.
posted by plaidrabbit at 1:00 PM on April 30, 2007

plaidrabbit - I have no intention of ever reproducing or republishing the material; I only want it for my own reading pleasure. Since I am not a student does that disqualify me from declaring my intentions as "fair use" and circumventing the need to license the material? Wouldn't "reproduction for non-commercial personal use" constitute fair use? It seems rather silly (not that this would be new in copyright law) to apply for a license to reproduce the material once for my own personal use in the same way that authors who are republishing the material do. I'm not sure about Wylie but the A.M. Heath website merely lists application and licensing fees relevant to commercial republishing. I guess I'll need to write them a rather naive-sounding e-mail.
posted by inoculatedcities at 1:43 PM on April 30, 2007

The problem with the theory that "It's just for personal use" is that EVERYTHING you buy is just for personal use - every video recording, sound recording, and book is a non-commercial non-reproducing copy that is sold to you. Pictures and documents are covered under this too.

The main argument I"m trying to make is that these guys may sell actual reproductions of this for the private market, or may have licensed (or intend to license or reproduce in-house) copies of this. If its as esoteric as it appears, this probably isn't the case - but large holding/agent companies may just reserve these rights by default.

Would someone probably catch you if you make a copy? Would it be worth their time to try and nail you for one copy you haven't given to anyone? Probably not. You're in a corner, though, as the people who have the documents won't copy them without clearance. Whether or not you should have to have a license, it looks like you need one. They probably will give it to you if you present yourself as a reasonable fan, for either free or for a nominal fee.

Since you're not a student, and they own the rights to keep you from obtaining a reproduction, you have to get permission. You may not get it, but at least you can try for it.
posted by plaidrabbit at 2:58 PM on April 30, 2007

One other consideration not directly addressed yet is that you're asking to see the work of a living person. There may be an agreement between Mr. Delillo and the institution holding the materials about their use. He probably owns the copyright on at least his letters and may have made conditions on the archiving institution.

I agree that it's worth trying, but you should know what the issues will be. But always try. Curiosity is its own reward.
posted by Toekneesan at 4:47 PM on April 30, 2007

I used to work at the Ransom Center (as did my husband, who would be much better at answering this questions since it falls under his former duties, but he's off saving the world one reference question at a time, so . . .)

It's hard to tell. I knew of a few collections that would flat out refuse any request. The Copyright holder (often not the author) was not about to release photocopy or, much less, publication rights at this particular Celsius reading in hell. But the manuscripts staff all knew who they were, and we would nicely let the prospective researchers know not to waste their ink. So if the librarian didn't wince at the sound of your request, I'm guessing DeLillo (his archives are past my time) didn't set off any futility alarms.

And after we'd instructed would-be-researchers on the proper agencies to call, we often wouldn't hear anything back. I'd never knew how many had been denied and how many had simply baulked at the extra step.

But I sure did pull a lot of manuscripts to be photocopied. And I remember working as a freelance transcriber for someone who wasn't able to get photocopy rights. If you were to create a compelling interest in the subject of one of the Center's holdings, you could sit in the reading room, look at the manuscripts - provided they were available for display - and transcribe what you read. You couldn't publish it, but you could make your own notes for your own edification, and for the future hope that publication permission might be granted to you.

Reaching back to my hazy, youthful, librarian days before the fall, and I seem to remember a condition that all photocopies eventually were to be eventually returned to the Ransom Center. So whatever personal usages you want the manuscript copies for, it won't be a permanent situation

That's a pretty rambling, late-night recollection of bureaucracies
long forgotten. Advice - go for it. If they say no, go the transcriber route (if indeed, you are interested in the text and not in the artifact nature of the manuscripts.)
posted by bibliowench at 9:49 PM on April 30, 2007