Instead of discussing the copyright law directly with me,
The University of Chicago's Legal Services Department contacted one of my Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that host my web pages, and demanded that the images be removed.
Although, personally, I might be willing to expend the time and money necessary to defend myself against a law suit by The University of Chicago's Legal Services Department,
I did not want my ISP to be subjected to that, so I authorized the removal of the material, as well as most of the web site (because it contains a lot of personal fair use material) .
After material was removed from that web site, I received an e-mail message from The Oriental Institute of The University of Chicago.
Here is an edited part of my e-mail reply:
Those web pages have indeed been removed.
The University of Chicago Legal Services Department did NOT contact me (as I requested) with any citation of law or precedent cases justifying their opinion (with which I do not agree, either legally or philosophically) that my use of the images was a copyright violation.
Instead, they directly contacted ... people ... who maintain my web site. The University of Chicago Legal Services Department did not even show me the courtesy of copying me with their unilateral demands that my images be removed.
When I heard indirectly ... what The University of Chicago Legal Services Department had done, I then decided, since I did not want the people [who maintain my web site] ... to be involved with the inconvenience of a legal controversy, that most of my web pages should be removed, since much of my web site involves personal fair use.
I have also removed web pages from my mirror site at http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/
I still believe that my opinion is legally correct.
My legal opinion is based primarily on Title 17, Section 107, of the United States Code, which (to the best of my understanding) states:
------------------
Title 17, Sec. 107. Limitations on exclusive rights:Fair useNotwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include -
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
------------------
Here is how I believe that statute is applicable to my case:My use was for criticism, comment, and my individual scholarship and research.
(1) My use was non-comercial and not-for-profit expression of Free Speech.
(2) The copyrighted work is the Giza Plateau Computer Model, which includes many images and much text.
(3) My use was of only a very small portion of the images of the Giza Plateau Computer Model.
(4) If it has any effect at all, my use probably enhanced the potential market for and value of the Giza Plateau Computer Model, as my web pages did not contain enough information about it to compete as a source with The Oriental Institute of The University of Chicago, and it is possible that people browsing my web pages might thereby ahve been introduced to and become interested in the Giza Plateau Computer Model.
---------------------
If that code section has been repealed, or amended, then I am willing to consider modifying my opinion.
I deeply resent the fact that The University of Chicago Legal Services Department ignored my request that they communicate with me about the law.
I consider their tactics to be cowardly,
but
they are successful, and they did achieve their objective,
and
my web pages are off the web.
I do expect that I may in the near future put up a few pages explaining why my web pages are gone.
...
Tony Smith 23 Mar 99
On 24 March 1999 (after most of my web site had been removed from the web)
an official of The Oriental Institute of The University of Chicago who had (on a personal level) been very reasonable and courteous in e-mail communications with me sent me an e-mail message stating (in part):
"... I will pass your latest email to me on to Legal Services, as you do state very clearly your position. Then we both will see what they have to say about it. ...".
On Wednesday (24 Mar 99) afternoon I received an e-mail from an Associate General Counsel of The University of Chicago, Samuel D. Golden, stating (in part) "... I do not believe fair use justifies the reproduction of a copyrighted image on a web site, even where the use is not-for-profit. ...", but it
did not indicate that Section 107 of Title 17 of the United States Code has been repealed or amended, nor did it cite a judicial case ruling that my interpretation of Section 107 is incorrect.
However,
the Associate General Counsel of The University of Chicago did state in that message:
"... People license these images. In the licenses they agree to pay a fee ...".
From this, I infer that the official legal position of The University of Chicago is that
Tony's Home was Off the Web, but Now It's Back.