ABSTRACT
While most colleges and universities initially took a conservative approach in applying the 1976 Copyright Law to reserve room operations, there appears to have been at least a minor backlash against that conservatism as the dust began to settle in the early 1980s. Harer and Huber, for instance, take an almost combative stance on the topic, noting that Section 107 “seems liberal regarding copying for purposes of academic instruction” and declaring that “until this language is clarified by future court decisions, it appears to allow considerable freedom in photocopying selected material to be retained in the library reserve room for instructional use.” 98 The authors go on to suggest that publisher’s concerns about excessive photocopying before the 1976 law centered on interlibrary loan practices rather than reserve. Furthermore, they cite a 1977 King Research report that found that most library photocopying fell within the standards of fair use and which “warned publishers not to expect library photocopying fees to produce much revenue.” 99 In the same article, Harer and Huber report the results a survey they conducted the previous year, those results indicating that, at least among academic libraries in Virginia, the Classroom Guidelines were not holding sway. More than 78% of the schools queried based their policies either totally or partially on Section 107 and more than 75% permitted copies to remain on reserve for longer than one term, a practice forbidden outright by the Classroom Guidelines. 100
