Fair Use of Existing Books

2020 ◽  
pp. 111-124
Author(s):  
Lea Shaver
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
Hypothetical Situation ◽  
Popular Belief ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
Address Book ◽  
Famous Book ◽  
Low Income Families ◽  
Broad Interpretation

This chapter analyzes the nuances of the copyright law book, such as translating a book into another language for academic use, adapting a famous book to make it more multicultural, or cheaply photocopying a book to give away to low-income families. Copyright exceptions are sometimes quite specific and clearly defined, while others are open-ended and subject to broad interpretation. It talks about the doctrine of “fair use” in America. Contrary to popular belief, the fact that something is widely done is no assurance that it is legally recognized as fair use. The chapter also provides a hypothetical situation in order to illustrate how the fair use doctrine might apply to a potential non-profit publishing project to address book hunger.

scholarly journals RESTRICTIONS ON COPYRIGHT IN UKRAINE AND THE UNITED STATES: A COMPARATIVE LEGAL ASPECT

2021 ◽  
pp. 5-10
Author(s):  
Yu. Akulov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Aspect ◽  
The United States ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
Educational Institutions ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
The Us ◽  
Exceptions And Limitations ◽  
Exhaustive List

The article compares the American copyright system (from its inception, borrowing the basics of the English system to the establishment of the principle of "fair use") and the Ukrainian system, which provides a specific list of cases allowed as a restriction of copyright (enumerated system) by establishing in national legal acts of the three-stage test provided by the Berne Convention. The article examines not only the legislation of Ukraine and the United States in this area, such as: the Federal Copyright Act of 1790, the second Federal Copyright Act of 1909, the Copyright Act of 1976, the Civil Code of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine "On Copyright law and related rights" but also the case law of the United States, which is a key element in regulating disputes in the area under discussion. The author analyzes a number of cases through the prism of changing approaches in the US system of property rights restrictions, namely Philpot v. Media Research Center Inc. No. 1: 17-cv-822 dated January 8, 2018; Peteski Productions, Inc. v. Leah Rothman No. 5: 17-CV-00122 dated August 30, 2017; Rosen v. eBay, Inc., No. 2: 13-cv-06801-MWF-E of 16 January 2015 and Corbello v. DeVito No. 2: 08-cv-00867-RCJ-PAL June 14, 2017. As a result of the research, the author determines that the national legislation establishes an exhaustive list of works that are its objects, at the same time, the ways of using the work depend on the type of particular work. Therefore, an exhaustive list of all possible ways to use the works is not provided. U.S. law provides for an exhaustive list of copyrighted works and an exhaustive list of ways to use such works. And the doctrine of "fair use" in the United States provides that in determining whether the use of work in any particular case is fair, there are at least 4 factors to consider. Keywords: the principle of "enumerated system", the system of "numerus clausus", the concept of "exceptions and limitations", US copyright law, the doctrine of fair use, the Agreement on guidelines for copying in non-profit educational institutions, free use of works, three-stage test.

scholarly journals Innovative Partnerships to Address Food Insecurity during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Brighter Bites Produce Voucher Program

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (17) ◽  
pp. 9175
Author(s):  
Amier Haidar ◽  
Christine Markham ◽  
Allison Marshall ◽  
Ru-Jye Chuang ◽  
Meredith Spence ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Descriptive Statistics ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
Participant Satisfaction ◽  
Voucher Program ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Program Participant ◽  
Low Income Families ◽  
The One ◽  
The U.S

The purpose of this communication is to describe the Brighter Bites produce voucher program, and its implementation and utilization across Brighter Bites families in four cities in the U.S., during the COVID-19 pandemic. The voucher program was implemented over nine weeks starting April 2020, with up to four USD 25 store-specific produce coupons sent bi-weekly to the homes of each participating Brighter Bites family (USD 100 total/family). Measures included type of produce purchased, amount of voucher that was used, number of vouchers distributed and redeemed by families, and a post-program participant satisfaction survey. Descriptive statistics, including count, frequency, and percent, were computed, both overall and stratified by city. During this time, Brighter Bites distributed a total of over 43,982 vouchers to 12,482 low-income families, with a redemption rate of 60% (at least one voucher redeemed) across all cities. During times of crisis, non-profit–for-profit partnerships, such as the one between Brighter Bites and the grocery retail industry, are feasible, and successful in providing produce to families in need.

scholarly journals Achieving the Anchor Promise: Improving Outcomes for Children, Families and Communities ~ A Resource Review

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-112
Author(s):  
Patricia Dawson
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Research Report ◽  
University Administrators ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
Community Institutions ◽  
Anchor Institutions ◽  
Effective Role ◽  
Low Income Families ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
The Impact

Achieving the Anchor Promise offers insight into ways anchor community institutions such as hospitals or universities can measure the impact or key areas where they can play an effective role in bettering the welfare of their communities. Funded by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, this research report highlights more than 75 in-depth interviews with individuals from a broad range of institutions including non-profit leaders, community activists, hospital and university administrators and federal officials. “Best Practices” as well as challenges are reviewed with the goal aimed at helping Anchor Institutions to move from programs to impact and ultimately to delivering benefits to low-income families and communities

Demonstrating Nutrient Cost Gradients: A Brooklyn Case Study

2014 ◽  
Vol 84 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 244-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Karp ◽  
Gary Wong ◽  
Marguerite Orsi
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Energy Content ◽  
Food Selection ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Micronutrient Deficiencies ◽  
Caloric Density ◽  
Low Income Families ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact

Abstract. Introduction: Foods dense in micronutrients are generally more expensive than those with higher energy content. These cost-differentials may put low-income families at risk of diminished micronutrient intake. Objectives: We sought to determine differences in the cost for iron, folate, and choline in foods available for purchase in a low-income community when assessed for energy content and serving size. Methods: Sixty-nine foods listed in the menu plans provided by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for low-income families were considered, in 10 domains. The cost and micronutrient content for-energy and per-serving of these foods were determined for the three micronutrients. Exact Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for comparisons of energy costs; Spearman rho tests for comparisons of micronutrient content. Ninety families were interviewed in a pediatric clinic to assess the impact of food cost on food selection. Results: Significant differences between domains were shown for energy density with both cost-for-energy (p < 0.001) and cost-per-serving (p < 0.05) comparisons. All three micronutrient contents were significantly correlated with cost-for-energy (p < 0.01). Both iron and choline contents were significantly correlated with cost-per-serving (p < 0.05). Of the 90 families, 38 (42 %) worried about food costs; 40 (44 %) had chosen foods of high caloric density in response to that fear, and 29 of 40 families experiencing both worry and making such food selection. Conclusion: Adjustments to USDA meal plans using cost-for-energy analysis showed differentials for both energy and micronutrients. These differentials were reduced using cost-per-serving analysis, but were not eliminated. A substantial proportion of low-income families are vulnerable to micronutrient deficiencies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document