text:
realmagick.com The shrine of knowledge.
Inclusive Development
A selection of articles related to inclusive development.
Original articles from our library related to the Inclusive Development. See Table of Contents for further available material (downloadable resources) on Inclusive Development.
- Discovery and Development of Reiki
- "The more we care for the happiness of others, the greater our own sense of wellbeing becomes." The Dalai Lama The traditional story of the discovery of Reiki is as historically correct as the biblical report of the life of Jesus - it is molded and...
Body Mysteries >> Reiki
- White Light Shields
- [On White Light & Purity As Defensive Measures] This article grew from an informal reply to a simple question posed to me some time ago. The question was: "Please explain why you say that purity of spirit and calling down the white light are not...
Psychic Abilities >> Psychic Protection
- Bringing it Down to Earth: A Fractal Approach
- 'Clouds are not spheres, mountains are not cones, coastlines are not circles, and bark is not smooth, nor does lightning travel in a straight line.' B. Mandelbrot W e want to think about the future - it's our nature. Unlike other creatures, humans possess an...
Mystic Sciences >> Astrology
- The Aeonic Perspective of the Enochian Temples
- The initiatory system of the Enochian Temples divides the path of initiation into four major stages, distinguished primarily by the types and sources of the influences they are sensitive to. Briefly, these stages are: 1. Lunar-planetary, focused in Yesod and...
Magick >> Enochian
- The Blue Ray: An OBE Ceremony Experience
- This is what happened to me, many years ago, after my very first successful deliberate wake induced OBE. I had been trying to project for several months at this time, and had made a projection attempt almost every night for the previous two weeks. Trying to...
Astral Projection >> Out of Body Experiences
- Enochian Temples: The Lower Temple
- The previous sections dealt with the Temple primarily in its relation to the macrocosmic world. The Servient squares were considered only in their formation as the floor, and were largely ignored otherwise. But they can also be grouped to form altars of the...
Magick >> Enochian
Inclusive Development is described in multiple online sources, as addition to our editors' articles, see section below for printable documents, Inclusive Development books and related discussion.
Suggested News Resources
- Toward Inclusive Economic Development
- Now a new report released Monday by the Brookings Metropolitan Policy Program calls for a paradigm shift in economic development thinking, away from competitiveness and growth, and toward a more inclusive prosperity. While 95 percent of the largest ...
- Davin promotes inclusive development at Chamber Breakfast
- For Dennis Davin, his appearance at the most recent PowerBreakfast meeting held by the African American Chamber of Commerce was like old home week. He got to reconnect with people he'd worked with as the head of economic development for ...
- Social media and pathways to inclusive development
- We have to encourage indigenous practitioners to be part of our larger academic community, not just studying what they produce; but creating a dialogue of respect and returning back to our community our own products for their use and validation.
- Financial inclusion is an inseparable element for inclusive development: PN Das
- Financial inclusion is an inseparable element for inclusive development which accounts for the overall economic growth of India: P. N. Das, GM, Financial Inclusion & Development Department, RBI.
- Cuba Debates Role of University for Inclusive Development
- Havana, Feb 16 (Prensa Latina) The challenges of inclusive economic and social development in Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as the innovative role higher education should play on it, are on the table today at the 10th International Congress, ...
Great care has been taken to prepare the information on this page. Elements of the content come from factual and lexical knowledge databases, realmagick.com library and third-party sources. We appreciate your suggestions and comments on further improvements of the site.
Inclusive Development Topics
Related searchesglasgow subway subcrawl
somatic therapies
dream dictionary ruins
mewtwo manga appearances
spirituality in business
helen keller childhood
noonan syndrome history
Related books
About - Contact - Advertising
© 2000 - 2016 Realmagick.com, All Rights Reserved.
© 2000 - 2016 Realmagick.com, All Rights Reserved.


text:
The post Here we go again: latest GSU ruling an odd victory for libraries appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
My first thought when I read the new ruling in the Georgia State copyright lawsuit brought by publishers over e-reserves was of one of those informal rules that all law students learn — don't tick off your judge. From the first days of the original trial, the arrogant antics of the attorneys representing the publisher plaintiffs — Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, and Sage Publishing — clearly put them in a bad light in the Judge Evans' eyes. Those chickens came home to roost in this latest opinion, especially where the plaintiffs are chided for having filed a declaration about what licenses were available for excerpts back in 2009, even after the Judge told them not to, since that information had not been introduced as evidence in the original trial. All of that evidence was stricken, and the Judge based her new opinion on the evidence that was before her in that first trial. I can imagine that the publishers might use that ruling as a basis for yet another appeal, but if they do so, they had better be able to prove that the evidence is genuine and reliable, and to explain why, if it is, they did not produce it at trial back in 2011.
But I have put the cart before the horse; let's look at the ruling we just received from the District Court. In case some have lost track, this case was originally decided by a 2012 ruling by Judge Evans that found infringement in only five of 74 challenged excerpts, and awarded court costs and attorney's fees to GSU as the "prevailing party" in the case. The publishers appealed that decision to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which vacated the trial court holding in 2014, sending the case back to Judge Evans with a set of instructions on how to improve the fair use analysis for these challenged excerpts. As has been noted many times before, the publishers lost nearly all of the big principles they had wanted to establish in the case; the Court of Appeals refuted most of the publishers' arguments even as it did what they asked and vacated the first ruling.
Now, using the new fair use analysis directed by the Court of Appeals, Judge Evans has handed the publishers yet another loss. One wonders how many times they will have to lose this case before they finally learn something about the state of copyright law today. Still, this loss for the publishers is only the oddest sort of victory for libraries.
The new fair use analysis that Judge Evans uses is carefully designed for situations where the challenged use in not transformative; the non-transformative nature of the use means that the small portions used must be scrutinized very carefully, and it means that the fourth factor — the potential impact of the use on the market for or value of the original — gets extra weight. It is very important to notice this fact, because it means that this analysis used by Judge Evans will not be applicable in many other situations, especially in academia, where the uses are, unlike with e-reserves, transformative.
Even though both the trial court and the Court of Appeals have held that e-reserves are not transformative, both courts have affirmed that the first fair use factor — the purpose and character of the use — will still favor fair use when that purpose is non-profit and educational. So throughout this new decision, Judge Evans continues to hold that the first factor always favors fair use.
The analysis of the other factors has changed, however. For factor two, the nature of the original, Judge Evans does not make a blanket assumption, owing to instructions from the Eleventh Circuit, but looks at the nature of each excerpt. In most cases, she finds that informational matter is mixed with more individualized scholarly commentary, and the result is that this factor is usually neutral — neither favoring nor disfavoring fair use. In the few cases where it counts against fair use, it has little impact (the Judge says this factor is only 5% of each decision).
In the same way, factor three now gets a more careful and specific analysis. The 10% or one chapter rule that Judge Evans used in her first opinion is gone, at the instruction of the Court of Appeals. Instead, Judge Evans looks at each excerpt and evaluates its appropriateness to the allowable purpose (from factor one) and its potential to substitute for a purchase of the book (market substitution, anticipating factor four). In many cases, she finds that the excerpts are a very small number of pages and a small percentage of the entire work (so not a market substitute), are are also narrowly tailored to accomplish a specific teaching objective. In those cases, this factor will favor fair use.
Factor four, which the Judge now believes should constitute 40% of the fair use decision in this particular situation, is where most of the action is in this ruling. The analysis, the Judge says, is two-fold, looking at both harm to the potential market for the original and harm to the value of the work, which means looking at the importance of the licensing market. About this latter source of potential value, the Judge says that she must decide "how much this particular revenue source contributed to the value of the copyright in the work, noting that where there is no significant demand for excerpts, the likelihood of repetitive unpaid use is diminished" (p. 9). The result of this inquiry is that a lot of financial information about each book — its sales over time and the amount of revenue derived from the permissions market — is very important in the fourth factor analysis. The charts for many of the books that reflect this information make for fascinating reading, and contain information I suspect the publishers would rather not have made public. This is where it becomes most difficult for libraries to apply the analysis that Judge Evans is using, because the Court has access to information, and time to analyze it, that is not available to libraries as they consider e-reserve requests. Still, I think it is important to note that the standard the Judge is using in this evaluation is pretty high and it is focused on value to the authors and to users:
[W]e must determine how much of that value (the value of the work to its author and the potential buyers) the implied licensee-fair users can capture before the value of the remaining market is so diminished that it no longer makes economic sense for the author — or a subsequent holder of the copyright — to propagate the work in the first place (page 8, quoting the 11th Circuit).
In other words, this analysis is opening up a significant space in the idea of market harm, which permits potential fair users to diminish the value of the work in question to some degree, as long as that reduction in value is not so steep as to discourage writing and publishing these academic books. Licensing, in this analysis, is the remedy only for that kind of steep loss of value; it is not a mere right of the copyright holder to obtain all the value from the work that is possible.
Judge Evans applied this complex formula for fair use to 48 challenged excerpts. It was only 48 because for 26 of the ones discussed in her original ruling she found that there had been no prima facie case for copyright infringement made out, either because the publishers could not show they held the copyright or because there was no evidence that any students had used the excerpt. This part of the ruling was not challenged, so only these 48 fair use rulings had to be redone. Bottom line is that she found fair use for 41 of the 48, and infringement only in seven cases. As Brandon Butler points out in his discussion of the ruling, even that might overestimate the infringement, since it appears that the summary in the decision may list at least some instances of infringement that were actually found, in the specific analysis, to be fair use.
So this ruling, like each ruling in the case, is clearly a disaster for the plaintiff publishers. Once again it establishes that there is significant space for fair use in higher education, even when that use is not transformative. Nevertheless, it is a difficult victory for libraries, in the sense that the analysis it uses is not one we can replicate; we simply do not have access to the extensive data about revenue, of which Judge Evans makes such complex use. So what can libraries do, now that we have this additional "guidance" about e-reserves from the courts? I think there are two fundamental takeaways.
First, we should continue to do what we have been doing — making careful fair use decisions and relying on those decisions when we feel the use is fair. While we do not have much of the information used by the Court in this latest ruling, we still do have the security provided by section 504 (c)3 of the copyright law, which tells us that if we make good faith fair use decisions we, as employees of non-profit educational institutions or libraries, are not subject to statutory damages. This greatly lowers our risk, and adds to the disincentive to sue academic libraries that must surely stem from the GSU experience. All we can do, then, is to continue to think carefully about each instance of fair use, and make responsible decisions. We still have some rules of thumb, and also some places where we will need to think in a more granular way. But nothing in these rulings need fundamentally upset good, responsible library practice.
The second takeaway from this decision is that we should resort to paying for licenses only very rarely, and when there is no other alternative. The simple fact is that the nature of the analysis that the Court of Appeals pushed Judge Evans into is such that licensing income for the publishers narrows the scope for fair use by libraries. To my mind, this means that whenever we are faced with an e-reserves request that may not fall easily into fair use, we should look at ways to improve the fair use situation before we decide to license the excerpt. Can we link to an already licensed version? Can we shorten the excerpt? Buying a separate license should be a last resort. Doing extensive business with the Copyright Clearance Center, including purchase of their blanket campus license, is not, in my opinion, a way to buy reassurance and security; instead, it increases the risk that our space for fair use will shrink over time.
[personal note — this will certainly be my last word here at the Scholarly Communications @ Duke site, and it is fitting that it deal with the Georgia State case, about which this site has seen so much commentary. For the sake of continuing this conversation and including more discussants, I am also going to post this piece on the new group blog of which I am a part, IO: In the Open. Apologies if the repetition is annoying to anyone.]
The post Here we go again: latest GSU ruling an odd victory for libraries appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
The post Moving into the open appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
I do intend to keep blogging, however, at a different site and in a different format. Over the past few weeks, some colleagues and I have assembled a great group of people interested in scholarship, publishing and libraries, and I am excited to announce a new, collective blog called IO: In the Open.
On this new site, this group of people will be writing about how scholarship and scholarly publishing is changing and can change in ways that better adapt to new technologies, needs, and economics:
Amy Buckland
Institutional Repository Manager, University of Chicago Library
William Cross
Director, Copyright & Digital Scholarship, North Carolina State University Libraries
Ellen Finnie
Head, Scholarly Communications & Collection Strategy, MIT Libraries
Patricia Hswe
Digital Content Strategist, Penn State University Library
Lisa Macklin
Director, Scholarly Communications Office, Emory University Library
John Sherer
Director, University of North Carolina Press
Sarah Shreeves
Associate Dean for Digital Strategies, University of Miami Libraries
Kevin Smith
Dean of Libraries, University of Kansas
Claire Stewart
Associate University Librarian for Research & Learning, University of Minnesota
Shan Sutton
Vice Dean, University of Arizona Libraries
The title of this new blog should not surprise folks. It is born out of the conviction that scholarship should be open because…
Scholarship in the open is better business – it provides a clearer perspective on what it actually costs to produce articles, books and other scholarly output.
Scholarship in the open is better for libraries – it connects us more directly with our researchers and with the life entire life cycle of research. It improves our ability to disseminate the outcomes of research and get the materials they need into the hands of students, teachers and others quickly and efficiently.
Scholarship in the open pushes us towards better copyright laws — it encourages us to think about how copyright could better align with author incentives and reminds us that, because the reasons creators create are so various, the law needs more flexibility than it currently has.
Scholarship in the open is better scholarship – it can be read and evaluated by a much larger and more varied audience. It takes the initial process of evaluating works of scholarship out of the hands of a small elite, some of whom are ill-prepared for the task, and offers the potential for more diverse ways of measuring impact and providing more complete information for the hiring, tenure and promotion process.
Our first blog post at IO: In the Open, by Ellen Finnie of MIT, will focus on the vital issue of how we spend our money in libraries, and how we can think in broader terms about the value of scholarly resources. Ellen's post, with its interesting analogy to food-supply chains, will be published on IO within the next day or so.
I hope that the people who have followed Scholarly Communications @ Duke so faithfully over the years will also subscribe to IO: In the Open. We believe you will find a interesting, committed and diverse set of voices there that will help shape the discussion of these issues in years to come.
If you follow this blog on Twitter (Twitter handle @klsmith4906), that account will also tweet out new post from IO: In the Open. Or, you can follow our new IO Twitter account: https://twitter.com/IOIntheOpen. You can also subscribe directly to the IO: In the Open blog posts by using the widget on the side of the IO page.
The post Moving into the open appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
The post Some radical thoughts about Sci-Hub appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
My radical thoughts have been prompted by the many very conventional reactions to stories about Sci-Hub, which collects academic papers using .edu proxies and makes them available without charge and in disregard of the rules imposed on distribution by the copyright holders. These reactions have followed two predictable trajectories, with one group calling what the site and its founder Alexandra Elbakyan are doing civil disobedience. Indeed, Ms. Elbakyan herself has apparently cited Article 27 of the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights as a justification of her project, which now host nearly 50 million articles. On the other side of the debate are those who are shocked by this disregard of the law, and especially by the apparent willingness of some libraries or librarians to use Sci-Hub to obtain research materials for their patrons. All this debate, by the way, has been provoked by a lawsuit against Sci-Hub brought by publishing giant Elsevier, a move which has predictably increased attention to the site.
One thing that has been particularly disturbing to me about the various statements expressing outrage over Sci-Hub is how focused they are on the values and opportunities of the developed world. One comment I saw pleaded with librarians to respect the law and not to use Sci-Hub "just to save money." Such moralizing misses a couple of basic points, I think. The first is that Sci-Hub seems directed at, and is certainly mostly used by, researchers and students in the developing world, where it is not merely a matter of "saving some money," it is a question of finding any way at all to get access to scientific and medical research. We tend to forget that a $30 paywall, while a mere inconvenience to those of us in the U.S. or Europe, can be an insurmountable roadblock for someone in Cambodia or Malawi who is trying to learn about a medical condition.
Another point about the righteous defense of "the law" in some of these comments is that laws come in different forms and carry different kinds of moral authority. Lawyers distinguish, for example, between illegal acts that are "wrong in themselves" (malum in se) and those that are only "wrong because prohibited," or malum prohibitum. ( there is a discussion of this distinction, for those with a sense of humor, in the movie Legally Blonde). Copyright infringement is, of course, the latter; a violation of the law but not of any moral imperative. Such a law merely enshrines a decision about the distribution of resources, and it can be changed without causing the collapse of human society. Precisely the kind of situation where acts of civil disobedience to provoke discussion and change are most supportable.
This is where the radicalism comes in, when we look at what copyright law does, how it has been used over time, and what Sci-Hub is actually doing. These questions were raised for me by the fascinating comment by Thomas Munro on this blog post, which is itself defending the idea of Sci-Hub as civil disobedience. Dr Munro's comment, the first that follows the post, points out that Sci-Hub is doing what U.S. publishers did for a long time — she is refusing to recognize copyrights granted by other countries. Dr. Munro writes as follows:
What Elbakyan is doing – ignoring foreign copyright – was official US government policy for more than a century. As a result, books were much cheaper than in Europe and literacy skyrocketed. When the US finally caved, in 1888, the editors of 'Scientific American' thundered that "The extension of copyright monopoly to foreigners will enable them to draw millions out of the country" and that it would turn US customs officers into "pimps and ferrets for these foreigners".
As one Senator said in voting against the bill: "An international copyright is simply a monopoly … what is known as protection, or taxing the people to make a few persons rich … It seems to me that there can be no excuse for carrying this restriction upon human knowledge."
That the publishing industry thrived in the U.S. by ignoring copyright is a well-known but little discussed aspect of our history with scholarly communication. Perhaps those early American publishers did not see themselves as practicing civil disobedience; they may have just been trying to maximize profits. But their willingness to ignore foreign copyrights when it served what they believed was a more important purpose really does call us to the root of the matter. Copyright law is an instrumentality, not a good in itself. It's role in our legal system is to encourage creativity and the production of knowledge. When it ceases to do that it deserves to be challenged and changed.
I believe that copyright has a continuing role to play in the academy and in the reform of scholarly communications. But we do no favors to that role when we treat copyright law as enshrined and inviolable, as if it had been decreed from Mt. Sinai. Instead we should focus on what the law is intended to accomplish, where and why it fails in its purpose, and how we can make it more adaptable for the digital age. One key to a clearer assessment of copyright law is to know its history a little better, and in his blog comment Dr. Munro also offered us a pointer for that task — a citation to a doctoral dissertation, now freely available an e-book:
Eric Anderson. (2010). Pimps and Ferrets: Copyright and Culture in the United States, 1831-1891. http://archive.org/details/PimpsAndFerretsCopyrightAndCultureInTheUnitedStates1831-1891
I haven't read Anderson's book yet, but I am anticipating a more detailed and nuanced view of how copyright has been used and abused through the vicissitudes of American history.
The post Some radical thoughts about Sci-Hub appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
The post Prognosticating about the new LoC appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
So it is not a surprise that library organizations were quick to praise the nomination of Dr. Hayden, who is currently CEO of the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore. As Inside Higher Ed tells us, Dr. Hayden is credited with improving the finances at Enoch Pratt and with new technological initiatives. Just what the LoC needs.
It is also interesting to see that open access advocates have been equally pleased with this nomination. Public Knowledge, for example, issued this statement welcoming the nomination. The reaction from writer, blogger and open access advocate Cory Doctorow was a little less restrained, referring to Dr. Hayden as "a rip-snortin', copyfightin', surveillance-hatin' no-foolin' LIBRARIAN." And TechDirt notes that the President explicitly mentioned open access is his statement about Dr. Hayden. As a reason for nominating a candidate for Librarian of Congress, support for open access is as unprecedented as is Dr. Hayden's gender or ethnic background.
All this begs the question of what the chances are that Dr. Hayden will be confirmed. Of course, she might encounter difficulties just because of the general dysfunction in Congress or because of a desire to obstruct anything the President thinks is a good idea. Carla Hayden's nomination may just be collateral damage in the ongoing conflict between the White House and Capitol Hill. But let's assume for a minute that the nomination does move through the process in Congress — it would be very unusual to see a fight over a Librarian of Congress, after all — and consider the possibilities.
One consideration would be the attitude of the groups that lobby on behalf of Big Content. The RIAA issued this statement in support(?) of the nomination, which certainly seems to damn with faint praise. In fact, Cory Doctorow reads this statement as evidence that the RIAA is afraid of Dr. Hayden. Could it be that she might push the Copyright Office a little bit out of the embrace with Big Content that it has enjoyed in recent years?
This possibility points us to the real drama of the nomination, in my opinion (if drama is not too, well, dramatic a word to use). The issue, anyway, is the effect that Dr. Hayden's nomination might have on the efforts to move the Copyright Office out of the Library of Congress. The reasons given for this effort, which I wrote about here and here, seem twofold. The first is the fact that the LoC technical infrastructure has become out of date. As I said in the earlier post, that is something we might expect a new Librarian to address, and it seems certain that Dr. Hayden would be well-placed to make those improvements. So if that is the concern, it seems that her appointment should slow the momentum to make the CO an independent agency, or to move it to the Department of Commerce.
But statements regarding the idea of moving the CO also make some veiled references to a conflict of mission between the Copyright Office and libraries. This can only refer to that trend toward the CO becoming a lobbying arm of the content industries, and that conflict — it is shameful, in my opinion, to admit publicly that the Copyright Office is not first and foremost dedicated to the public interest, as are libraries — is only likely to get worse with the nomination of Dr. Hayden. So if we see foot-dragging and an unwillingness to act on this nomination, I think there will be more behind that inaction than just generic reluctance to accept this President's nominations. I think we will be seeing the quiet but firm opposition of the lobbyists from Big Content, who may be hard-pressed to oppose Dr. Hayden openly but will very likely want to sabotage the nomination in order to preserve their regulatory stranglehold over the Copyright Office.
The post Prognosticating about the new LoC appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
The post Backing into the public domain appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
I was a little startled, therefore, to see headlines last week saying that a settlement in the case was asking the judge to declare "Happy Birthday" to really be in the public domain. My first reaction was to wonder if a court can actually do that. Public domain status is not actually defined anywhere in the law; it is, rather, an absence of copyright protection. So the question that popped into my head was, if there is not sufficient evidence to determine whether or not there is copyright protection for the song, can a court just declare that any putative protection that might exist is simply void? Can the court do a kind of quitclaim on copyright for a particular work?
A little more attention to the issue reminded me that this is not, in fact, what is happening (there is another story about the settlement, with a less dramatic headline, from the New York Times, here). In fact, the Judge is being asked to approve a settlement document in which several of the parties in the case explicitly deny that the song is in the public domain, but agree to release any claims they may have. They go on to state that they know of no other claimants who could assert ownership, so they believe that, with the release made by the settlement (assuming it is approved), "Happy Birthday To You" will be in the public domain. So the "quitclaim" here is from the parties, as logic suggests it must be (see sections 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 in the settlement document linked above). But these portions of the settlement also contain a promise that the parties will not object to a declaratory judgment from the court, sought by the plaintiffs, that the song will be in the public domain as of the final settlement date.
In a conversation about this, some friends and I joked that we had found a new solution to the orphan works problem — just ask courts for declaratory judgments that no copyrights continue to exist in such works. A court would not do that, of course, without at least having all the known possible claimants before it and willing to relinquish their claims. And it is a risky strategy for any court, because in theory an unknown claimant could arise at a later date, and it is not clear what effect such a declaratory judgment might have on their rights, if they had evidence that supported their claim. That is unlikely in most cases, and extremely unlikely in the "Happy Birthday" case, where all the potential claimants seem to be at the table. Nevertheless, this result in a particular situation does not really offer a positive way forward for most orphan works.
If declaratory judgments are a poor way to address most orphan works because they attempt to adjudicate the rights of unknown parties who do not have a voice, the same might be said of the Copyright Office's extended collective licensing scheme, which seeks to collect money on behalf of those unknown rights holders. Such a plan would create a situation not unlike that which prevailed for years around "Happy Birthday" — users paying the wrong party for the right to use a work for which the real rights holder is unknown.
It seems clear to me that the best solution to the orphan works problem in many situations, including mass digitization of distinct and distinctive collections by libraries, is fair use. The HathiTrust and Google Books cases pointed us in that direction in a way that this lawsuit over "Happy Birthday" cannot. Nevertheless, that case does serve as a reminder, at least to me, of the variety of resources that courts have at their disposal that might address an orphan works situation. Several common law doctrines used to preserve equity in property disputes come to mind — the doctrine of abandonment, for example, or even adverse possession. Perhaps most useful would be laches, a common law doctrine that tells courts that they can refuse to hear a claim (usually in equity, whereas copyright claims are claims in law) if the party asserting its rights has "slept on" those rights, which is to say has unreasonably delayed or been negligent in enforcing them.
Courts have a great deal of space to deal creatively with disputes, which is one of the best things about our common law system. Various doctrines have evolved over time that could help courts preserve fairness in a dispute over some use of an orphan work, presuming that a claimant comes forward at some point. But the truth is that none of these fall-back positions are really needed in most cases because Congress gave us a statutory solution for this issue, although it is rooted in common law itself — fair use.
The post Backing into the public domain appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
The post Steal this book? appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
This week, however, I got a chance to see more fully what that researcher, whose name is Roxana Robinson and who was giving a lecture that afternoon in the Library, has to say about Google, in a column she wrote for the Wall Street Journal called "How Google Stole the Work of Millions of Authors" (behind a paywall). Ms. Robinson, a novelist and biographer, unfortunately proves what I suspected at the time of our encounter, that her perspective on fair use is based on a preconceived idea about who are good users entitled to rely on fair use (authors) and who are bad, unworthy users (Google), rather than on an understanding of the careful legal analysis of specific uses that actually underlies these decisions.
The WSJ column employs some interesting rhetoric, starting with its title, which is clearly intended to provoke a visceral response. Many people have noted that the language of theft and stealing is inappropriate when the issue is copyright infringement. This point is made in great detail in William Patry's book "Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars." As is true for most crimes, the definition of theft includes an intention, a mental state or "mens rea" that is a required element of that crime. For theft this intention is "to deprive the true owner of [the personal property]" (definition from Black's Law Dictionary, Seventh edition). Because of the nature of intellectual property, copyright infringement never meets this definition; that is why the law has a different word — infringement — for the unauthorized taking of someone else's IP.
So the headline of Ms. Robinson's column is legally incorrect and intended, I think, to stir up her base rather than to make an argument that could sway the Supreme Court (for more on this point, see the rebuttal published in Fortune "Why the Authors Guild is Still Wrong about Google's Book Scanning").
The column also makes a couple of sardonic remarks about quotes that can be found using Google Books. Here the argument breaks down pretty badly, because both of the quotes Ms. Robinson chooses, one from Shakespeare and one from Emerson, are in the public domain. Her effort to be ironic seriously backfires here, because her own column is actually proving the utility of the Google Books database in a way that emphasizes its lawful use of PD texts. Rhetoric has truly overcome logic.
It is worthwhile, nevertheless, to think a minute about the logic structure of the argument that what Google has done is infringement. Ms. Robinson makes the point that there are many books that were scanned by Google, that Google is a profitable company, and that no authorization for the scanning was asked for or given by the authors of the works that were scanned. All of this is true, of course, but it does not amount to an argument that Google has infringed any copyrights. What is missing, at least as I see it, is any notice that the authors have been harmed. The rhetoric of the column clearly tells us that the Authors Guild, and at least some individual authors who are involved in the lawsuit, are angry. But it does not explain a fundamental element of any tort action — harm.
The two courts that have considered this case both found that there was no harm done here — no negative impact on the market for or value of the works in question, to use the language that is part of a fair use analysis. Users cannot obtain any significant portions of books that are limited to snippet views; the AG's own experts were unable to retrieve as much as 16% of any work using word searches and snippet results, and even that amount of text was randomized in a way that made reading a coherent piece of the work impossible. The is just no evidence that any sales are lost due to this finding aid, and it is quite possible that sales will be gained.
There is, of course, the question of a licensing market. But that is almost a silly question. A market for licensing scans to create an index has never existed, and it is impossible to imagine that any of the authors had such an idea in mind when they wrote their works. As Judge Leval said in his decision for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, this is not really even a use of the work, it is a use of information about the work, for which a secondary licensing market simply is not appropriate. Creating such a market would be revolutionary, and it would do much more harm to the overall environment for books and reading than anything Google could think up. What the Authors Guild seems to be saying here is that Google should pay us for something we never thought we would or should get paid for, simply because they have a lot of money. Perhaps when we recognize how weak that argument actually is it becomes understandable that Ms. Robinson relied on overheated rhetoric rather than legal or logical arguments. But if the purpose of her essay is to convince people that the Supreme Court needs to take the case to right a serious wrong, it falls far short, and is unlikely to convince the nine citizens whose opinion on that issue matters the most.
The post Steal this book? appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
The post Should you #DeleteAcademiaEdu? appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
Yesterday afternoon a kerfuffle arose on Twitter about Academia.edu, a social networking site for academics, where many academic authors have profiles, share their publications, and connect with other scholars. You can read about the beginning of the controversy in this article the Chronicle of Higher Education posted this morning.
The ensuing tweetstorm followed a fairly typical trajectory – moral outrage, call to action, a hashtag, and then of course the inevitable backlash, with each side calling into question the integrity of each other's motivations, or at least the consistency of their actions.
The chief concern, or at least the one that appears to have caused the most heated debate initially, was whether paying for promotion of one's scholarly work was equivalent to "vanity publishing", but the discussion evolved into the broader issue of whether the fact that Academia.edu is a commercial service meant academics should avoid it, with several people on Twitter calling that out as hypocrisy, given the many other commercial transactions that academic life is entangled with.
My own opinion is that this is a straw man argument, and it misses an opportunity to have a more nuanced discussion about what's really at stake here. This isn't a morality play, and it's not about whether charging for "monetizing" something is in itself a bad thing – for me it's about choices, and making informed choices about keeping or ceding control to one's own work. It's also about being open vs being closed. Despite the impression that #DeleteAcademiaEdu is just railing against capitalism, I'd argue that it's really about promoting a more competitive marketplace, one where the data is open for any number of potential services (consortial, member-supported, or even commercial) to do interesting and useful things with it – may the best service win, or may many complementary services thrive.
The challenge with sites like Academia.edu is that this is not possible. By most accounts, Academia.edu is a fine service, and clearly it's meeting a need, as the number of academics who have profiles in it shows. They are doing very well at motivating academics to put their profile data and publications there. But what happens to that information once it's there? By my read of the site's terms of service, no other uses can be made of what you've put there – it's up to Academia.edu to decide what you can and can't do with the information you've given them, and they're not likely to make it easy for alternative methods of access (why would they?). There doesn't appear to be a public API, and you need to be logged in to do most of the useful things on the site (even as a casual reader). They were among the first to create enough value for academics to encourage them to sign up, and kudos to them for that, but does that mean your profile data and publications should be exclusively available via their platform? This is what's called "vendor lock-in" – it's very good for the vendor, not so good for the users.
While it's understandable that companies will try to recoup their investments through such approaches, it nonetheless goes against the ethos of academia, and of how the Internet functions best. A few years ago at a conference I heard a speaker say
"On the Internet the opposite of 'open' is not 'closed' – the opposite of 'open' is 'broken'"
(If I remember correctly, it was John Wilbanks)
So yesterday when I first started reading some tweets about people deleting their Academia.edu accounts, I tweeted
When you #DeleteAcademiaEdu see if your univ has a www.vivoweb.org site. Many do. Duke's is scholars.duke.edu #openaccess too
— Paolo Mangiafico (@paoloman) January 28, 2016
VIVO is an open source, open access, community-based, member-supported profile system for academics. It has been implemented by many universities and research organizations, and makes linked open data available for access and integration across implementations. In some institutions, like my own, it is connected to our open access institutional repository, so Duke researchers can easily make the full text of their publications be linked directly from their profile – open to anyone, no login required, always in the author's control. And the custodians of the system and the data are the researcher's home institution, as well as… well, here I'll quote from an article Kevin and I wrote a couple of years ago:
"this brings us to a discussion of another major player in this ecosystem that we have not yet addressed—a set of organizations that are mission driven, rather than market driven; that are widely distributed and independently operated, and therefore less vulnerable to single points of failure, and that were designed to be stable over long periods of time; that are catholic in their scope, strong supporters of intellectual freedom, and opponents of censorship and other restrictions on access to knowledge; and that are in full alignment with the mission of learning, teaching, and research that constitutes the primary reason why authors write academic articles. We are, of course, talking about libraries."
This, ultimately, is why I think scholars will be better served by having the core data for their profiles and their research tied to open systems like VIVO, and to their universities and their libraries. Sure, the interfaces might not be as elegant, and we might move more slowly than a commercial service, but we're in it for the long haul, we share your values, and we're not going to try to lock in your data.
If someone wants to harvest the data from VIVO and our repository and layer on a better social networking or indexing service, that's great – the data is available for that, and we have an open API. Do you want to charge for the service? No problem, as long as the people you're charging know that they're paying for your service add-ons, and not the data itself, which remains open and free to anyone else to use it outside the paid service. Do you have a service (like Academia.edu) that's really good at convincing authors to enter their CV and upload their articles? Wonderful – make the data available unencumbered, and we might be willing to pay you to do the collecting for us (especially since institutional repositories haven't been as successful in doing so).
The key reasons why authors should choose first to work with their scholarly communities rather than purely commercial enterprises isn't that making money is bad – we all have to earn a living – but that the goals and values aren't necessarily in alignment. I've used a lot of words to say something that Katie Fortney and Justin Gonder said in December (in "A social networking site is not an open access repository") and Kathleen Fitzpatrick said a few months before that (in "Academia, Not Edu"), but the Twitter discussion sparked yesterday has made many more people aware of this issue, so I wanted to underline these ideas, and say a bit more about it than would fit in my tweets yesterday afternoon.
You have a choice, and the choice I hope you will think more about is whether you feel more comfortable investing your time and efforts with your home institution and your library, whose incentives and values presumably align with your own, and who will contribute to an open ecosystem, or with a service whose incentives and values and life span are unknown, and whose business model relies on being closed. If you're comfortable with the trade-offs and risks, and willing to exchange those for the service provided, then don't #DeleteAcademiaEdu. But I hope you will use this opportunity to look into whether alternatives exist that will meet your needs while keeping your options open and your data open, and preserving your ability to keep control of your work and make sure it's not helping sustain an ecosystem that's broken.
If you've read this far, I hope you'll also tolerate this shameless plug for an upcoming event that will be a forum for addressing many of the issues discussed above – the Scholarly Communication Institute. The theme of SCI 2016, to be held in Chapel Hill, NC, in October, is "Incentives, Economics, and Values: Changing the Political Economy of Scholarly Publishing." We invite teams to submit proposals of projects they'd like to work on that fit this theme, and to build a dream team of participants they'd like to spend 4 days with working on it. For proposals that are selected, we pay expenses (thanks to a grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation) for the team to come to the North Carolina Research Triangle and work on their project alongside several other similar teams, in an institute that's part retreat, part seminar, part unconference, and part development sprint. You can find out more about the institute at trianglesci.org – proposals are due March 14, so if you're interested, start putting together your team soon.
The post Should you #DeleteAcademiaEdu? appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
The post Copyright MOOCs, new and refreshed appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
That course ran in the summer of 2014. In July of 2015, we were able to release a new version of the same course in an on-demand format, meaning that participants are able to start the course whenever they wish and can proceed at their own pace without a proscribed ending point.
The move to on-demand is important because it brought us a bit closer to our overall goal, which has been to provide a form of copyright education that is accessible in the several sense of that word to all of our colleagues in education, especially. The course is still free, although there is a small fee if the participants want to receive a "verified certificate" of completion. We began this project aware that the Center for Intellectual Property at UMUC had recently closed, so the education community had lost access to their series of course offering on copyright that carried continuing education credit. Our hope was to provide an opportunity to learn about copyright that was free to all, but also could be used, through the verified certificates, by those colleagues who want to learn about the subject AND get some form of (less expensive) credit for this professional development activity.
Now we have taken another big step toward that goal, with the release today of our second MOOC, on Copyright for Multimedia. Like the first course, this MOOC is on-demand, free to take, and relatively short – four substantive modules and an introduction. In this second course, the modules focus on four different media – data, images, music and film. It grew out of our awareness how often the questions brought to us focus on different media. Many of our colleagues seem confused about how copyright "rules" from the print world, apply in an environment rich with diverse forms of expression and communication. This confusion is understandable, since copyright was born with print technology and continues to adapt only uncomfortably to these "new" media.
When we are asked about what "copyright for music," or "copyright for film," looks like, we try to emphasis that the one copyright law in the U.S. is intended to apply without regard to medium of expression. Nevertheless, it is perfectly true that some provisions of the law are media-specific. More significantly, the circumstances in which different media are used are often quite different from the more familiar facts surrounding the use and distribution of print. There is an lawyer's maxim that says, "change the facts and you change the outcome," and that is never more true that when we are talking about different media.
Our new MOOC tries to address these differences, and also to further develop the framework for analyzing a copyright issue that we built in the first course. Now that both MOOCs are available on the Coursera platform, we hope that they will be a continuing resource to improve copyright understanding for our colleagues.
I want to add a couple of personal notes to this announcement of the two-part series of MOOCs on copyright.
First, I want to say what a wonderful experience it has been to work with Lisa and Anne, who are as smart and creative about teaching as they are about copyright, as well as with the online course team at Duke. I want especially to note my sense of awe at the creative, complex and realistic scenarios that Anne Gilliland can think up to tease out the implications of copyright in different situations; I hope our participants find them as thought-provoking and amusing as I do.
Second, because of the announcement issued today about my new position as Dean of Libraries at the University of Kansas, and thus my departure from Duke, it seems unlikely that I will participate in any more MOOCs in this series. Our original plan was for three courses, but the two we now have stand alone and, we hope, also work together as a series. It is now an open question whether there will be a third MOOC in this series, but the process of creating these two has been delightful, and the product, I profoundly hope, useful to our colleagues and to many others.
The post Copyright MOOCs, new and refreshed appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
The post Rebels in the Campus Bookstore appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
As the semester winds down most normal people are sweating through final projects, scheduling visits with family and friends, or looking forward to a well-deserved holiday break by the fire (or at least the warming glow of the new Star Wars movie). I can't stop thinking about textbooks.
Several recent events have kept this topic on my mind. First, Kevin and I are preparing to teach a class in the spring and we're currently putting the finishing touches on our assigned readings. Sitting at the breakfast table working through the syllabus, I was struck by a seemingly-unrelated comment from my wife, Kimberly, who is finishing her first semester in a doctoral program. Making her own plans for the spring, she noted "I need to decide if I'm going to renew my statistics textbook."
Readers who have been out of school for a few years might be surprised that many students like Kimberly rent, rather than purchase, their more expensive textbooks. If textbook rental companies like Chegg and College Book Renter are not familiar names, you may also be surprised by how quickly textbook prices have spiraled out of control in the past decade. Increasing at nearly triple the rate of inflation, textbook costs have outpaced rises in health care and housing prices, leaving students with an expected bill of more than $1,200 a year.
Faced with these unsustainable costs, students like Kimberly find themselves in an arms race, seeking alternative channels to acquire textbooks while publishers work to plug leaks in their captive marketplace. Indeed, one of the largest copyright cases decided by the Supreme Court in recent years resulted from publishers' attempt to create a "super-property" right in order to quash the sale of less expensive international textbooks. The following year a casebook company attempted something similar using license provisions to strip property rights from students who "purchased" (ironically) their property law textbook.
While prices have gone up, student spending has not always followed suit, with many students renting, borrowing, or pirating textbooks. Many more simply choose their courses and majors based on the costs of textbooks or delay their purchases to determine the extent to which a title is used in class, setting them back days or weeks in assigned readings. Of greatest concern, a recent PIRG survey revealed that more than 65% of students simply muddle through with no textbook, even though the majority recognized that this presented a "significant concern" for their ability to successfully complete the course. As a result, more than 10% of students fail a course each year because they simply cannot afford the book.
Textbook costs have priced many students out of equal participation in higher education and colleges and universities should regard this as social justice issue that threatens students' academic progress. Students have written powerfully about these issues on social media, using hashtags like #textbookbroke to document the burdens
created by high prices. For example, tweets from Kansas' #KUopentextbook project have documented the harm done by students' lost opportunities to travel to conferences, take unpaid internships, and compete on equal footing in the classroom. As one student put it, "my wage shouldn't determine my GPA."
Closed, commercial textbooks also do significant harm to instructional design and academic freedom, forcing instructors to use one-size-fits-all books rather than diverse, tailored course materials. This issue received national attention in November when an instructor was formally reprimanded for refusing to assign a $180 algebra book written by the chair and vice chair of his department. As SPARC's Nicole Allen notes, the well-intentioned practice of assigning a single book for multiple sections was designed to support a strong local used-book market but in practice it often entrenches a system of static commercial works. It can also homogenize educational materials, limiting them to publisher-approved narratives that inhibit an instructor's ability to bring her own voice and experience into the classroom. Indeed, many publishers include value-added materials like test banks and pre-made assignments designed to create textbooks that are fully "teacher-proof."
Students are often caught in the crossfire of a broken textbook market where books are sold by a small group of for-profit publishers who control 80% of the market, and purchasing decisions are made by faculty instructors but students are asked to pick up the bill. This situation – where for-profit publishers leverage faculty incentives to exploit a captive academic market – should sound familiar to anyone working to bring open access to scholarly publishing. The scale, however, is quite different: the textbook market exceeds the scholarly journal market by roughly $4 billion each year.
As they have with open access, academic stakeholders have begun to rebel, designing open materials that are not just cheaper than closed works but are positively better. These open educational resources (OER's) may be peer-reviewed Creative Commons-licensed textbooks like those found in Rice University's OpenStax program or the University of Minnesota-led Open Textbook Network. They also encompass modular learning objects like those found in the MERLOT repository or even full courses like those offered through MIT's OpenCourseWare. Community colleges and system-wide efforts like Affordable Learning Georgia have been particularly effective in this space, with programs like Tidewater's "Z-Degree" that completely remove student textbook costs from the equation.
In the past several years, academic libraries have joined the fray, raising awareness, offering grants, and collaborating with faculty authors to create a diverse body of open educational resources. In the NCSU Libraries, we have followed the outstanding examples of institutions like Temple and UMass-Amherst by offering grants for faculty members to replace closed, commercial works with open, pedagogically-transformative OERs. These projects create massive efficiencies for libraries – spending a few thousand dollars to save students millions – and a growing body of empirical data indicates that student learning and retention are improved by open materials.
It's no surprise that an open textbook would be more effective than one that a third of students can't afford to buy. The greatest potential for OERs, however, comes from the way they empower instructors and engage with library expertise. The "teacher proof" books offered today frequently reduce instructors to hired hands, reciting homogenized narratives approved by for-profit publishers. In contrast, as one recent study concluded, an OER "puts ownership of curriculum directly back into the hands of teachers, both encouraging them to reflect on how the materials might be redesigned and improved and empowering them to make these improvements directly." Combined with support from libraries for instructional design, copyright and licensing, and digital competencies, OERs have the potential to transform pedagogy at the deepest levels.
For today's students, textbook prices mean more than just a few extra days of subsisting on ramen noodles. Too often, students have to choose between adding another thousand dollars to an already historical debt load or trying to get by without essential resources and closed, and commercial textbooks often leave faculty instructors with no choice at all. These, to borrow a phrase, aren't the books we're looking for.
The post Rebels in the Campus Bookstore appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
The post Swatting three bugs at once appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>
So here is the problem. A librarian is searching for a DVD of a relatively obscure foreign-language film from 1938, and concludes that she cannot obtain a copy through ILL because the professor who is requesting the film plans to show it in her classroom. The request went to a librarian list as a plea for help in finding a copy of the film to purchase because, the librarian had concluded, ILL was not an option.
As I say, I think there are three potential misapprehensions behind this conclusion that sometimes cause librarians to restrict their options for obtaining material out of a misplaced fear of copyright problems.
The first possible reason someone might be hesitant in this situation is the notion that audio/visual works cannot be loaned through ILL. It is easy to see the source of this mistake, since various A/V materials are explicitly excluded from the two provisions in section 108 of the copyright law that authorize copying for ILL (subsections d and e). But we must remember that those two subsections of section 108 are only about making copies for ILL; they have no impact on the issue of loaning originals. So where an original of a DVD (that is, a lawfully-made copy that is made with the direct authorization of the rights holder) is requested, ILL is perfectly OK.
Now here is one of the caveats. Many institutions decide not to loan audio/visual works because of work flow and availability issues. They may fear damage that can occur during mailing. Those are perfectly fine reasons to decline to loan a DVD, and the holding library is entitle to make such a decision. Just because the law allows a practice does not mean any particular person or entity is required to do it. But it is important to recognize that a decision not to loan A/V works through ILL is just that, a decision. It is not based on a legal prohibition.
The next potential misconception here is that the doctrine of first sale, which is what really does underlie all lending of originals from a U.S. library, somehow does not apply to the particular DVD in question. But first sale, found in section 109 of the copyright act, does allow the lending of any type of original of a copyright-protected work (with a narrow exception for computer software that is not relevant to this discussion). Whether it is a copy of a book, a filmstrip, a music CD, or a DVD, first sale — which is an exception to the exclusive right over distribution — allows lending of the lawfully made original. It does not matter if that loan is accomplished through ILL, or library reserve, or simply between two friends. Nor does it matter, after the Supreme Court ruling in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley, where the lawfully-made original came from; as long as it was original made with the consent of the rights holder (i.e. not a bootlegged copy) it can be loaned.
Here is a good place for my second caveat. These rules from the copyright act about ILL, lending of originals and, in a moment, classroom showings, are default rules. They are in place unless they have been changed by an agreement between individual parties. Where there is such an agreement, it is the agreement that provides the rules and restrictions for those parties, while the default rules of the copyright law apply to everyone else and in regard to any other topic or material. So if the specific DVD was obtained under a license that prohibited lending or ruled out classroom showings, that license should be obeyed. Likewise if the film is part of a licensed database. But most individual DVDs do not come with their own license. Instead, they are purchased under the default rules for distribution, performance, and lending that I am describing here.
Which brings me to the last potential misunderstanding, that a borrowed DVD cannot be used for a classroom showing. Classroom showing is allowed, as most academics know, as an exception to the exclusive right over public performance. Actually, the exception is somewhat broader than in-class performance; it allows a public performance or display of a copyrighted work in any "face-to-face teach activity" that takes place in "a classroom or similar place devoted to instruction." So it is easy to imagine a film showing that would qualify, as part of an in-person teaching activity, even when not directly connected to a scheduled class or a regular course. More importantly, for our issue, the copy used for such a showing need only be "lawfully-made," the same requirement as for the application of first sale, described above. There is nothing to prevent a classroom showing of a DVD that is borrowed from the library, from Redbox, from your neighbor, or through ILL.
This problem has given us a chance to examine three potential misunderstandings that can sometimes cause librarians to restrict their own activities unnecessarily, out of fear of copyright issues. It is easy to see how such misconceptions arise, since the law is complicated on these points. But, properly understood, the law often gives more leeway to libraries than we often realize. It is nice to have the chance to dispel these myths. Now if I could just get those bugs out of the house!
The post Swatting three bugs at once appeared first on Scholarly Communications @ Duke.]]>

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Goodbye Hamilton: Unabridged
First published in 1984, and now reissued in hardback, continues the story of Maisie who has now escaped from her disastrous marriage and is a successful author. However, it seems she cannot escape sorrow for long. From the author of HAMILTON, TILLY TROTTER AND THE CINDER PATH.
Please visit Help Page for Questions
regarding ISBN / ISBN-10 / ISBN10, ISBN-13 / ISBN13, EAN / EAN-13, and Amazon
Home | ISBN Directory | Affiliate
Program | Contact
Copyright © 2003-2014 AllDiscountBooks.net All rights reserved.


text:
Dalco Mesh Umpire Shirt - White
Hover for
larger image
Customer Reviews
Tim L.
April 22, 2016
Very thin and flimsy. Tails are not long enough. Smitty is much better product at better price
Ralph B.
Victoria, BC
June 18, 2014
This is one great shirt. Looks sharp, washes well and really fits great over my Wilson West Vest Platinum Umpire Chest Protector. It also dries quickly so its ready to go for the second game of a double header. I recommend this shirt for all umpires.
Danny Campbell
May 10, 2010
"I really like the shirt. The shirt size runs slightly larger than other brands. (I wear XL but found L will fit over my baseball chest protector.) They are a little more "stiff" which allows for a newer look, longer. They wear well. In my opinion, maybe a little hotter, but a really great shirt!"
Chuck Stiefken
Highland, California
February 20, 2008
Glad I found a source for the Dalco shirts. They are the best. Stretch to go over the chest protector and fit like a glove. No more needing help getting a shirt on.
John Bostwick
December 27, 2007
From my point of view I love buying this brand for umpire shirts because they are a little tighter fit (which I really like). They are the best shirts to wear in the warm weather because they are very breathable. Personally I think they look the best on an umpire rather than having an umpire with a huge baggy shirt on. Also you guys have the best prices on these.
Product Blog Posts
Multi-Sport Official's Secret to a Military-Tight Shirt Revealed
Learn the secret about what's available to keep your umpire and referee shirts tucked in with that crisp, tight military appearance of authority.
LAST CHANCE ALERT: Some Discontinued Umpire Apparel Still Remain
Reebok Zig Magistrate Umpire Base Shoes, Majestic Umpire Jackets and umpire shirts from Dalco, Majestic and Ump-Attire.
Keep your Shirts in Top Shape!
Find out how fellow umpires and referees keep their shirts in top shape all season long.


text:
- Moxxy Minx
- 8:01
Moxxy Minx sure knows how to p...
Czech MassageShocking revelation! 3 spy cameras in a massage salon. We spy on Czech girls during a massage. They have no idea they are being watched. You will be shocked when you see whats going on inside! Real footage! You wont believe your eyes! Watch the shocking reality!


text:
Nb: infants must be under the age of 2 and
children must be under the age of 12 at the time of
Built in the 1980's the Hotel les 4 Vallees is a chalet style property offering a warm and welcoming place to stay. The rooms are decorated with pine-clad interiors and offer spacious accommodation including large bathrooms and balconies. The Hotel les 4 Vallees is approximately a five minutes walk to the main ressort centre of Verbier and around 100 metres from the Medran lift station.
20 rooms


text:
Back View
Show MoreLess
Now Viewing:
Questions? Ask our experts:
800.606.6969 Live Chat
The OMEZ OM204 HTL STONE 512 Controller is a DMX512/1990 standard controller. It has a total of 512 DMX controlling channels and offers distribution of computer soft-light channels (1 to 24 channel settings). The controller's rotary knobs can be used to adjust the pan and tilt (X/Y) smoothly. The keyboard can be locked independently to avoid accidental operation. The Stone 512 Controller can store up to 40 scenes, each up to 100 step-by-step procedures.
|2 x XLR-D3F
|25.9 x 15.7 x 3.5" (66.0 x 40.0 x 9.0 cm)
|Net Weight
|22 lb (10 kg)
|Packaging Info
|Package Weight
|27.0 lb
|Box Dimensions (LxWxH)
|22.0 x 20.0 x 8.0"


text:
The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge
Doubleday, 1966 - Philosophy - 203 pages
From inside the book
2 pages matching Theodor Geiger in this book
Page 217
Where's the rest of this book?
Results 1-2 of 2
What people are saying - Write a review
Review: The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of KnowledgeUser Review - Michael - Goodreads
This book totally changed my life and my perspective on the world. A must read for anyone who thinks they know something about reality and natural laws. Read full review
The Problem of the Sociology of Knowl
The Foundations of Knowledge in Everyday Life
Society as Objective Reality
5 other sections not shown
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
actions Alfred Schutz analysis apprehended Arnold Gehlen become biography biological body of knowledge child cial cognitive concept conceptual machinery consciousness constructed context continuing conversation course defined definitions of reality deviant dialectic distribution of knowledge Durkheim empirical example existence experience face-to-face situation Georg Simmel historical human sexuality identity ideology important individual individual's institutional order institutionalization integration intellectual interaction interest internalized jective knowl language latter legitimation Mannheim's Marx Marxism meaning meaningful mediated mythology nomic objectivated objective one's ongoingly philosophical plausibility structure possible primary socialization problem procedures produced psychological question reality of everyday reification relationship relevant religious roles Scheler's Schutz secondary socialization sectors sense sexual significant social processes social structure social world society sociological theory sociologist sociology of knowledge sociology of religion specific stock of knowledge subjective reality subuniverses symbolic universe Talcott Parsons Theodor Geiger theoretical Thomas Luckmann thought tion tradition types typifications Voudun


text:
Johnson Utilities Summer Pool Safety Tips
This is a public service announcement from Johnson Utilities.
Arizona has the highest child-drowning rate in the US. Don't put our children in danger!
Johnson Utilities, Johnson Community Library, YMCA, CPR Pro's, Leslie's Pool Supplies, and Drowning Prevention Coalition of Arizona have teamed up to make our community aware of the dangers of children and water.
The YMCA provides a variety of water safety classes to help families and children learn good water safety practices designed to help prepare for life-threatening emergencies. Be a part of creating a more aware healthier, better prepared community by signing up for one of the water safety classes.
With many life-threatening emergencies happening in or around the pool area, it's more important than ever to be prepared in case you're confronted with an emergency. Being prepared can avert tragedy and minimize the possibility of injury or death.
Tragically, 16 deaths, including 7 of them being children, have resulted from 43 water related incidents this year, and we are just getting started. Drowning is the leading cause of death for children ages 1 to 4 in Arizona. Johnson Utilities and the Johnson Community Library have been provided literature to share with the community.
Please stop by Johnson Utilities or the library located at 968-1 E Hunt Hwy and pick up a free Drowning Prevention Packet.
Prevent Drowning - Block, Watch, and Learn
- Make sure your pool or spa has an effective barrier, such as a fence to help guard against unauthorized access.
- Your pool or spa should have a barrier regardless of whether they are covered.
- Door and windows leading to the pool areas should be locked.
- Fence gates should have self-closing, self-latching mechanisms. Latches need to be out of reach of young children.
- Never leave your child unattended in or near a swimming pool, hot tub, spa, not even for a second.
- Keep toys, tricycles, and other children's play things away from the pool or spa.
- Don't consider your children to be "drownproof" because they have taken swimming lessons.
- Don't allow barriers, such as fences or walls, give you a false sense of security regarding your child's safety.
- There is No substitute for adult supervision.
- Learn how to administer CPR, mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, and other lifesaving techniques. To administer CPR correctly you must be properly trained.
- Know how to contact your local emergency medical services. Install a phone or keep a cordless phone in the pool or spa area. Post the emergency number in an easy to see place.
- Learn to swim and teach age appropriate children to swim.
Other Pool Safety Tips
- Do not allow children to play in or around the pool area.
- Mount life saving devices near the pool.
- Keep tables, chairs and ladders away from pool fences.
- Check placement of doggie doors for direct access to pool area.
- Post your local emergency number on the phone. Think about installing a phone near the pool area.
If you find a child in any source of water...
- Yell for help and pull the child out of the water.
- Call 9-1-1 or your local emergency number immediately!
- Begin CPR if you are trained.
- If you are not trained to administer CPR, follow the instructions from the 9-1-1 operator until help arrives.


text:
Fatal Frame II: Crimson Butterfly (Director's Cut)
| |
Release Date: November 1, 2004
Fatal Frame II: Crimson Butterfly Cheats & Codes
All | Cheats | Unlockables | Hints | Easter Eggs | Achievements
Check out our 1 cheat for Fatal Frame II: Crimson Butterfly.
1 UnlockablesSubmit an Unlockable.
Submitted by:PhantomConhi
You must be Logged in to submit a cheat.
Game Details
Published by: Tecmo
Developed by: Tecmo
Genre: Third-Person Adventure
Release Date:
United States: November 1, 2004
Japan: November 11, 2004
M for Mature : Blood, Violence
Also Available On:
Also known as: Fatal Frame II
Games You May Like
- Adventure
- Xbox
A first-person horror game with a mix of investigation, puzzle solving, exploration and combat as gamers battle evil incarnate.
A story-driven 3rd-person action-adventure sequel to The Longest Journey, with playable characters in three worlds fueled by science and magic.
Third-person stealth action game that puts you in control of an ex-CIA, ex-Navy SEAL who's called into service at the request of the NSA.
The defeat of the Covenant in the first FPS was only a temporary victory, as the alien attackers have renewed their mission to wipe out all humanity.
After Earth's distant colonies are devastated by an alien menace called The Covenant, a group of soldiers escapes to the space station HALO.…
FABLE is a groundbreaking role-playing adventure game from Peter Molyneux, in which your every action determines your skills, appearance, and…


text:
The Big Picture by Lennie Peterson
- August 19, 2013
- From Beginning
- Previous feature
- Next feature
- Current
No Zoom
Comments (2) (Please sign in to comment)
Lora is also actually spelled Laura.
Gee, I found 5 other things wrong. Lora is from Gilroy – the garlic capital of the world!
- Refresh Comments.
You must be signed in to make a comment.


text:
Alphabet Teacher Resources
Find Alphabet educational lesson plans and worksheets
Showing 1 - 24 of 6,131 resources
Phonics: Letter Recognition
Reinforce early reading skills with a packet of activities that focus on letter recognition. Class members match uppercase and lowercase letters of the alphabet, identify letters in popular nursery rhymes, and sort letters from print...
Pre-K - 1st English Language Arts CCSS: Adaptable
ABC It's as Easy as 1-2-3!
Help readers explore initial letter sounds. They will choose a letter of the alphabet and create a page for a classroom "ABC" book. They will write down various words that begin with their assigned letter and draw a picture to go in the...
Pre-K - K Visual & Performing Arts CCSS: Designed
Lowercase Letter a Coloring
Help young learners master their alphabet with this simple series of worksheets. Including a separate worksheet for each letter of the alphabet, children first trace the letters four times before writing them on their own and finally...
Pre-K - 2nd English Language Arts CCSS: Adaptable
Letter-Sound Match Cut and Paste
Develop beginning readers' understanding of letter-sound correspondence with this fun series of cut-and-paste worksheets. With each page focusing on four specific letters, children are able to practice isolating initial sounds as they...
4 mins Pre-K - 1st English Language Arts CCSS: Adaptable
Teacher Templates
Letter by letter, sound by sound, monitor the growth of your emergent readers with these assessment templates. Adaptable to the needs of individual students, these one-on-one assessments focus on children's ability to identify letters...
K - 3rd English Language Arts CCSS: Adaptable
Letter- Sound Correspondence: Brown Bag It
Sorting objects according to their initial sound gets scholars thinking about letter-sound correspondence in this interactive activity. Start with 26 brown bags, each labelled with a letter of the alphabet. Bring in some magazines with...
K - 1st English Language Arts
Letter-Sound Correspondence: Where's That Sound?
The phoneme train is leaving the station! Get your budding readers familiar with letter-sound correspondence using this fun phonics activity. They set up the initial sound and final sound train cards (included), placing a letter between...
Pre-K - 1st English Language Arts
Practicing Letters C and D
The lowercase letter c and d are highlighted in this two-part worksheet. Kids complete the top half by tracing then printing the letter c and locating images that begin with the /c/ sound. Part two requires them to trace then write the...
Pre-K - K English Language Arts CCSS: Designed
Practicing Letters W and X
Match initial phonemes to practice recognizing the sounds made by the letters w and x. Early readers circle all of the objects that begin with either an x or a w, then trace each letter several times. Try a fun variation by having...
Pre-K - K English Language Arts CCSS: Designed
Missing Letters
As your youngsters begin learning to read, use visual worksheets like this to help them tie objects to words. Scholars examine six images labeled with a word. Each word is missing a first letter, and they must use one of the letters at...
Pre-K - 1st English Language Arts CCSS: Designed
What's the First Letter? (A to H)
Here are eight words, and each of them is missing a letter. Not just any letter but the first letter. Oh my! Put your phonics masters to work and have them determine which of the eight letters (a-h) completes each word.
Pre-K - 1st English Language Arts CCSS: Designed
Early Childhood Education Lesson Plan for Good Night, Good Knight
The book Good Night, Good Knight is the inspiration for this plan. Learners get into small groups to search for words in books that begin with their names and fill out and illustrate their own personal letter and name pages.
K - 2nd English Language Arts CCSS: Adaptable
Practicing Letters e and f
Which of these words begins with the letter e? Scholars become familiar with lowercase letters e and f by visually matching. After tracing each letter, they draw lines from the letter to images beginning with the same sound. Encourage...
Pre-K - 1st English Language Arts CCSS: Designed
Animal Alphabet Chart
Engage young children in learning the letters of the alphabet with a fun animal alphabet chart. With the letters written in both upper and lower case and accompanied by pictures of animals beginning with each letter, this is a great...
Pre-K - 1st English Language Arts CCSS: Adaptable


text:
Video Release: 4/27/2004
Nancy Bouwens/span>/span>Source: VideoDirector:
Edward Dew
Genre: DramaRuntime: 800 min.MPAA Rating: Not RatedStarring: Nelson Leigh
Synopsis:The Living Bible Collection diligently walks you through the life and resurrection of Jesus The Christ, the movement and persecution of the early Christians in Acts of the Apostles and many important events and characters from the Old Testament.
Jesus The Christ is a series about our roots, from Mary's Immaculate Conception to Christ's death on the cross and His glorious resurrection.
Acts Of The Apostles is a story of Pentecost; the early Christian movement; the ordination of laymen; the campaign to wipe out Jesus' followers by Saul of Tarsus.
Old Testament encompasses events and characters, from the book of Genesis to the book of Malachi including Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Gideon and many more. The stories are full of love, hope and faith.
Includes a special bonus film: The Power Of The Resurrection, a beautiful dramatization of Christ's last days - the passion, death and resurrection - as seen through the eyes of Simon Peter.
Dove Worldview:This DVD series is a detailed journey of the Old Testament, life and resurrection of Jesus and the Acts of the Apostles in the days of the early church. The stories unfold with cadence and rhythm, drawing in the viewer, not just as an observer of the narrative, but as fellow sojourners through time and faith.
The Old Testament: A myriad of characters are brought to life from Genesis to Malachi; Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, David, Elijah and many more. Each account is a weaving of humanity, struggle, defeat and victory as the men and women of the bible seek to serve and know their God. The narrative is rich with the words of Moses, the faith of David and the perseverance of Joseph - with scripture coming to life in each scene.
The Jesus Series: The life of Jesus is told from conception to resurrection. The obedience and humbleness of Mary, struggle of Joseph, Jesus birth, growth, ministry, arrest, crucifixion and his return as a resurrected Christ to his followers and the world are portrayed throughout. The cast of characters and scenery backdrops are woven together to aid in the telling of this greatest of all stories-bringing faith, hope and grace to all who follow the steps and story of Jesus.
Acts of the Apostles: The early days of the church unfold through the apostles at Pentecost and their commission to spread the gospel throughout the whole earth. We see Saul's quest to eliminate the disciples and squelch the seeds of the church strike fear in the hearts of the early believers. The Spirit of God released upon these humble men and women changed the world one person at a time- continuing yet today.
The Living Bible portrays the retelling of timeless Bible stories with primarily the words of scripture as the narrative. The sound track is weak in places and the film is without the special effects found in modern films. The low tech rendition brings the viewer a sense of watching a Sunday school play or Easter pageant. The simplicity contributes to the age old message of God's love. It is suitable for all ages and we are pleased to award the Dove Seal to this film.
Content Chart & Description
Sex: None
Language: None
Violence: Spears, swords, crucifixion, betrayal, and death are all depicted in a way that is true to the telling of the story without blood or gore; sound of beating and whipping and stoning.
Drugs: None
Nudity: None
Other: None
The Dove Foundation is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization. Our mission is to encourage and promote the creation, production, distribution and consumption of wholesome family entertainment. We are supported primarily by donations from families such as yours who want to move Hollywood in a more family-friendly direction. All donations are tax deductible. The Dove "Family-Approved", Dove "Family-Edited" and Dove "Family-Filtered" Seals are registered trademarks of The Dove Foundation.
Copyright © 2010 - The Dove Foundation - all rights reserved
Review syndication authorized for ChristianCinema.com
What customers say about ChristianCinema.com:
" Excellent web site. First time using Christian Cinema. Easy to find items. Well developed. Easy to check out." - John Conrad
326 Sterling Browning Rd
Suite 123
Hollywood Park, TX 78232
1-888-466-8432Contact Us
Office Hours:
Monday-Friday 9am-5pm (Central)


text:
May 2015 News Update: No Charges Filed Against our Client in Venice High School Sexual Assault Case. Michael Goldstein's client was arrested with several other students based on allegations of sexual assaults. After a thorough investigation by both the defense and prosecution, the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office concluded there was "insufficient evidence" to file charges against any of the 15 students who had been arrested. This decision by the DA comes just two months after LAPD announced their "high profile" investigation. During the investigation, our office cooperated with law enforcement and our own investigation revealed a video tape that provided clear evidence that any contact involving our client was consensual. As the Los Angeles Times reported, LAPD has now closed the investigation.
Read Article in LA Times.
Local Attorney and Pan Pacific Park Advisory Board member Michael Goldstein is working to help the community. Miami Heat player Amar'e Stoudemire and local Los Angeles artist Retna, came together for the first installment of "In the Paint," a series of events at which kids join artists and basketball players to paint and play. Stoudemire also donated $20,000 to the park, the largest in history from an NBA player. Mr. Goldstein reached out to Retna and Stoudemire to organize an event to give back to the park.
Read Article in Park Labrea News/Beverly Press.
Specializing in Courtrooms in Los Angeles, San Fernando Valley, Van Nuys, Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Clarita, Ventura County, and Riverside County.
If you are facing criminal charges, it's absolutely crucial that you obtain experienced legal counsel right away. Without the representation of a skilled and experienced criminal defense lawyer, there is a much higher chance that you will be convicted of your charges. If convicted, you could be sentenced to any number of penalties that will have a serious effect on your life for many years to come. To increase your chances of avoiding a conviction and life-altering criminal penalties, it's best to hire an experienced, skilled, and dedicated Los Angeles criminal defense attorney to handle your case and defend you in court. An attorney can make sure your rights are protected and that you have the aggressive defense you need to fight your criminal charges. Our successful courtroom results speak for themselves.
We are committed to aggressively defending those charged with a crime. With more than four decades of combined experience in criminal law, James A. Goldstein and Michael A. Goldstein have defended thousands of clients, and have been able to help countless people avoid criminal convictions that would have been devastating to their reputations and their future. We strongly believe in the phrase, "innocent until proven guilty," and are very serious about our duty to prove our clients' innocence. Regardless of how serious, complicated, or complex a case may be, we are committed to aggressively protecting the rights of our clients during the most difficult time of their lives. Our firm was established on the principle that every client is our most important client. This sense of dedication and respect has rewarded us with 35 years of client loyalty and referrals.
At the Goldstein Law Offices, we offer defense representation in multiple areas of criminal law, including: drug crimes, such as
drug possession and
drug possession for sale,
domestic violence,
federal crimes,
violent crimes,
theft crimes,
sex crimes,
DUI (drunk driving),
criminal appeals,
expungements, and
medical marijuana cases.
If you or a loved one has been arrested and charged with a crime, selecting a competent and experienced criminal defense attorney will be the most important decision you may ever be faced with. Your freedom is too important! When facing criminal charges, you should seek the representation of a skilled defense lawyer who not only has a thorough knowledge and understanding of the criminal laws and court process, but who also has a proven record of winning criminal cases. We have protected the rights of the accused since 1975, and possess the experience needed to take on the toughest cases. In addition to our commitment to provide exceptional legal service, we work tirelessly to ensure that each client receives the personal attention and respect they deserve.
To discuss your criminal charges with a Los Angeles or Palm Springs criminal defense lawyer at our firm, please contact our law firm today!
In The News
Avvo - Five Star Client Review -
February 2016 - Not just an attorney, a genuine caring human being - I met Michael A Goldstein in 2010 after I experienced my first DUI. I've never been in trouble with the law I was petrified and scared. Michael assured me that he would handle all details and he did without a doubt. 2013 a year I will never forget, I experienced some severe issues with alcoholism. I was in one accident and arrested eight months later and faced myself with another two DUI counts in 1 year! Again not understanding the legal system or the language of law that I was facing, Michael again assisted me in handling every detail and assuring me that we would get through this together. He also stood by me while I seeked treatment, simply put...he cared!
It has not been an easy road but I followed what was suggested and I'm grateful so many ways to be able to share that Michael was not just my attorney but a caring compassionate and empathetic human being. When you follow directions and do what is told especially for me who did not understand and still struggles with the legal system, a lot of hard work paid off and I did everything that I was supposed to do and more! I'm almost three years sober now and it has changed my life when I think of the law I think of Michael A Goldstein. Judges & courts recognize those who help themselves. Michael has the best interest of the client at heart even though sometimes we are not always right.
En Espanol
Find Us on Google +


text:
- http://choosekeswick.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/bg-header.jpg
- http://choosekeswick.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/workout.jpg
- http://choosekeswick.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/lunch3.jpg
- http://choosekeswick.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/stretching1.jpg
- http://choosekeswick.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/gameroom.jpg
When you leave the hospital, you have a choice for what happens next. Inpatient and Outpatient Rehabilitation at Keswick helps you recover quickly, safely and with the support you need.
Community Health Services
From coordinating the resources you need to be Home & Healthy®, to stimulating your Mind as well as your body through our Brain Health Program – Keswick serves Baltimore's adult population beyond our Roland Park campus.
Keswick Assisted Living is a great place to call home. Our residents are active and engaged, with full access to Keswick's campus, amenities, and the healthcare support they need.
Keswick's Adult Day Services are the ideal option for older adults seeking socialization, meaningful activities, and the individualized care and attention they need.
Keswick's long-term senior care provides 24-hour comprehensive nursing and medical care in a comfortable and home-like setting.
Our Services
Get back to the life you love — quickly, safely and with the support you need.
When you leave the hospital, Keswick is here to help you start your journey home. Our Inpatient and Outpatient Rehabilitation programs provide customized care to fit your unique needs, including physical, occupational and speech therapy.
When you want the best: Choose Keswick.
Adult Day Services at Keswick provide transportation, nutritious meals, and a highly qualified team that has expertise in geriatric and dementia care, including our registered nurse, social worker, dietician, activities specialist and physical, occupational and speech therapists.
A higher level of care.
Families choose Keswick because our skilled healthcare team has a reputation for delivering a higher level of care for all of our residents. Long-term care residents require the commitment and attention of the area's most dedicated healthcare team – and that's what they'll experience at Keswick.
About Us
With 130 years of expertise, Keswick has become the area's premier provider of services for older adults. Committed to enhancing the quality of life for the guests and residents it serves, Keswick provides a variety of award winning services that enhance their lives & get them back to doing what they love.
Healthcare Facilities and Alzheimer's Disease
Carmel Roques, CEO of Keswick, was recently a guest on WPYR's All Things Considered to discuss how healthcare facilities can help people with Alzheimer's reach their potential and if a high-fat diet could slow cognitive decline for those in the early stages of the disease. Also featured was Jason Brandt, a neuropsychologist at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. He discussed his research and how Alzheimer's affects individuals and their loved ones.
Click here for more information and to listen to the show.