Readers of this thread may be interested in the Section 108 Study Group:
The Section 108 Study Group is a select committee of copyright experts, convened by the Library of Congress, and charged with updating for the digital world the Copyright Act balance between the rights of creators and copyright owners and the needs of libraries and archives. 
Additional information available here:
Cassy Ammen
Reference Specialist
Library Services
Library of Congress
Washington, DC 20540-4660
email:  [log in to unmask]
voice: 202.707.1965

>>> [log in to unmask] 08/10/05 7:56 AM >>>

I don't think copyright is involved in transporting files between buildings, since both buildings belong to the LC. A team I work with actually raised the issue of copyright some time ago, and I think in general copyright issues are still being worked out, at least in the area of digital rights management. I'm part of an IT team, but if you're really interested, I'd be glad to forward this question to someone who can answer it better than I and pass along the answer. 

Damien J. Moody
Information Technology Services
Library of Congress

>>> [log in to unmask] 08/09/05 6:36 PM >>>

What is the status of the copyright issues raised by sending the digital
files from Culpepper to the Madison Building?

Steve Smolian

----- Original Message -----
From: "Damien Moody" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] long range file storage

> Yes, there will be both audio and video. My understanding is that we
> expect our, as of yet not specifically defined "preservation quality"
> files could be up to 4 TB max. We're currently planning a disk/tape hybrid
> where the long-term storage will be done on tape and intermediary
> "derivative quality" files prepared from hard drive systems. I would just
> love to see a more efficient system, but we're breaking almost all-new
> ground here, so perhaps we'll be fortunate enough to develop one over
> time.
> Damien J. Moody
> Information Technology Services
> Library of Congress
>>>> [log in to unmask] 08/09/05 5:27 PM >>>
> Hello, Damien,
> I'm sure we'll all be interested in hearing the solution for
> Culpepper when it gets fully designed, implemented, debugged, and
> running--it's a fascinating project.
> Many (most?) archives don't grow 8PB per year. University of
> Toronto's TSpace system is one facility I've discussed using as a
> possibility for a campus project. This is modeled after work done at
> MIT and Cambridge, as I understand it. It's a disc/tape hybrid.
> An hour-long stereo audio CD, as you know, is about 0.6 GB. So, 1TB
> can hold about 1600 one-hour audio CDs. Your growth sounds like
> adding 12.8 million CDs to the archive annually. I realize that the
> LoC archive includes video so that is what really adds up. Are you
> planning on including high-resolution (4K?) film scans in this system?
> I do think that many of the people struggling here (i.e. on this
> list) have archives in the <10TB region (16,000 hours of stereo CD
> quality recording). I could be wrong
> Cheers,
> Richard
> At 05:11 PM 8/9/2005, you wrote:
>>But what would be the optimum system if you had an archive you
>>expect to grow at, say, 8 petabytes per year? Wouldn't spinning
>>disks be rather expensive or prohibitive in other ways?
>>Damien J. Moody
>>Information Technology Services
>>Library of Congress
>> >>> [log in to unmask] 08/09/05 4:45 PM >>>
>>Hi, Russ,
>>I think there are some archives who are not ready to make this step.
>>Personally, I've made the step to spinning discs as my sole storage
>>medium. I have at least three copies of each file, soon to be in two
>>separate buildings, linked by fiber optic 100 Base FX. The two main
>>stores are 1TB each and then there is additional storage amounting to
>>more-or-less another 1TB on individual machines (that hold the third
>>copy). There is a fair amount of expansion space left in the systems
>>I have. I could probably go to 3TB each with the architecture I have.
>>I only retain client files for the short term.
>>The cloning software does NOT propagate deletes and, in the instance
>>of digital images, does not propagate updates to all copies (some
>>copies are marked "digital negative," essentially).
>>Long ago and far away, I made CD and then DVD copies of everything.
>>It took forever. Now, I check the backup logs a few times a week to
>>see if there are any abnormal error messages (I always get a few
>>error messages on email as files change during the compare/copy latency).
>>My Brother-In-Law has about 7,000 slides that he would like to
>>digitize. He's been photographing architecture to illustrate his
>>teaching of history. I just looked at the scans that he had done at
>>the college, and they ranged from 837x564 to a few at 1500x2242. I
>>suggested that these were probably not the best scans for
>>preservation. He wants CDs. He's not ready yet to move to spinning
>>disks. I suggested we could put the PSD files on disks and we could
>>burn high-rez JPEGs into gold CDs. I'd hate to put the raw PSDs on
>>CD! (I am anticipating PSDs > 20MB/image in the final archival
>>scanning and JPEGs~3MB per image).
>>Two mindsets/paradigms need to be brought into focus:
>>(1) It's all data
>>(2) Use data center management techniques to make sure you don't lose it
>>At 04:07 PM 8/9/2005, you wrote:
>> >I've been following the discussion on long-range file storage, and it
>> >seems
>> >that with all the complexities of burning and storing optical media as
>> >well
>> >as concerns about being able to play the media decades down the line
>> >(storing original player devices, etc.) it may not be impractical to
>> >consider the alternative of redundant arrays of independent hard disks
>> >and
>> >tape backups - along the business model of data storage?
>> >
>> >Yes, a plastic CD or DVD in itself is cheap (even at $1), but might it
>> >not
>> >be more efficient, even more economical to set up systems like this?
>> >Once
>> >the system is engineered and set up, the technicians just create and
>> >save
>> >the audio files, concerning themselves only with file management,
>> >naming,
>> >metadata, and so on. Any thoughts on this?
>> >
>> >Russ Hamm
>> >Ed Tech Specialist
>> >National School District
>> >San Diego, CA
>> >
>> >
>>Richard L. Hess                           email: [log in to unmask]
>>Media                           web:
>>Aurora, Ontario, Canada             (905) 713 6733     1-877-TAPE-FIX
>>Detailed contact information:
> Richard L. Hess                           email: [log in to unmask]
> Vignettes
> Media                           web:
> Aurora, Ontario, Canada             (905) 713 6733     1-877-TAPE-FIX
> Detailed contact information:


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.4/66 - Release Date: 8/9/2005

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.4/66 - Release Date: 8/9/2005