Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Design topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Copyright lawyer: DC bill avoids the legal flaw that sank Maryland measure
Summary
Kyle Courtney testified the DC bill focuses on contract and consumer protection rather than compelling publishers to license works, and he highlighted a trigger clause modeled on Connecticut’s law to lower legal risk.
Kyle Courtney, a copyright lawyer and board chair of the Ebook Study Group, told the committee the bill is "not a copyright bill" and does not compel publishers to license works to libraries. Instead, Courtney said, the proposal prohibits certain contract terms that undermine libraries’ mission — for example, bans on interlibrary loan, perpetual repurchase requirements, and extreme secrecy clauses.
Courtney contrasted the DC approach with earlier efforts in Maryland and New York, where measures were drafted in ways that courts or executive branches viewed as compelling distribution and thus raising federal copyright concerns. "This bill does not require publishers to license anything to the district," he said, and the trigger provision — requiring adoption by 10 other jurisdictions representing at least 50 million people before DC’s law takes effect — is intended to reduce the risk publishers would withdraw content from a lone jurisdiction.
Courtney acknowledged publishers’ objections and said library advocates are still gathering oversight data; he also said existing evidence suggests library lending tends to expand discovery and retail sales rather than cannibalize them. He committed to submitting written testimony and supporting studies to the record.
