CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION

OF FINDINGS

4.0       INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the results in reference to objectives in chapter one. Gender composition of respondents, department in which the respondents belongs to. Findings on the benefits of fair use application in Kyambogo University, the challenges in application of fair use and the various techniques of application of fair use in utilization of information in academic libraries.

4.1       FINDINGS ON GENERAL INFORMATION

Table 4.1: shows the findings on the gender of the respondents

Source: primary data

Table 4.1 above shows that 66.7% of respondents were male and 33.3% were female. That means that the biggest percentage of respondents and employees in the kyambogo university male.

Table 4.3: Shows findings on age of the respondents

Source: primary data

From table 3 above shows that 10% of the respondents between 18-29 years, 13.3% are between the age of 30-39 and 76.7% are above 40 years. This therefore means that most of the employees are above 40 years of age.

Table 4.4: shows findings on education level of respondents

Source: primary data

Table 4.4 indicates that most of the respondents were undergraduates 33%, more that 33% hold diplomas and 23% of the respondents were degree holders and 10% of the masters.

Bar graph showing graphical representation of educational level of respodents

Source: primary data

According to the results in the sudy most of the respodents were undergraduates. Only few of the respodents were masters degree holders.

4.2 BENEFITS OF FAIR USE APPLICATION

Table 4.2: shows the benefits of fair use application

Source: primary data

From table 4.6above, findings revealed that, 80% strongly agreed that Proper acknowledgement of cited work has been enabled fair use, 20% agreed, 0% was neutral, 0% disagreed, while 0% strongly disagreed. This therefore shows that majority of respondents declared fair use helps in acknowledgement of fair use.

From the table the findings revealed that, 70% strongly agreed that fair use, Encourages originality of written work, 20% agreed, 10% was neutral, while non of the respondents neither disagreed nor strongly disagreed.

According to table above, 66.7% of respondents strongly agreed that fair use Ensures approval from research organizations, 33.3% agreed, no one was neutral, no one disagreed, and no one strongly disagreed, this is therefore clear that fair use helps scholars get approval from research organizations.

From the table4.6 above, 60% of respondents strongly agreed that fair use Enables originality of the information, 30% agreed, since 90% of the respondents strongly and agreed.

The table above indicates that 50% of respondents strong agreed that fair use Enables compliance of the information, 33.3% agreed, 16.7% was neutral, 0% disagreed while 0% strongly disagreed. Since 83% of respondents support the fact therefore it’s clear that fair use ensures compliance of information.

4.3. CHALLENGES IN APPLICATION OF FAIR USE

TABLE 4.3: SHOWS CHALLENGES IN APPLICATION OF FAIR USE

Source: primary data

From table above, 88% of the respondents strongly agreed that fair use has led to a dynamic legal doctrine, 12% agreed, while none of the respondents were neutral, disagreed, and strongly disagreed, This further shows that most of the respondents hold the view that fair use experiences legal doctrine.

According to table above it indicates that, 66.7% of respondents strongly agreed that The procedures are long in getting permission , 20% agreed, 13% were neutral, no respondent disagreed while non of the respondents strongly disagreed.

Findings revealed in table above, that 50% strongly agreed that there is beauracracy in the fair use systems, 33.3% agreed, 16.7% were neutral while no one disagreed and strongly disagreed. This therefore shows that fair use imposes a lot of beauracracy.

According4.6 to the table 80% of respondents strongly agreed that Fair use rights can be overridden by contractual restrictions, 20% agreed, while no one was neutral, disagreed and strongly disagreed.

From table above, majority of the respondents strongly agreed that fair use Fair use discourages research development while the remaining 27% agreed. None of the respondents were neutral, disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement.

4.4       DIFFERENT WAYS OF APPLICATION OF FAIR USE.

Table 4.4 : shows different ways of application of fair use.

Source: primary data

Table 4.8 above revealed that 80% of respondents strongly agreed that scholars can apply fair use can be applied by Employing ones fair use in good faith, This therefore shows fair use can be applied.

The table indicates that 70% of respondents strongly agreed that Institutions give permission to scholars for application of fair use, 20% agreed, 10% were neutral, none of the respondents agreed nor strongly disagreed, 90% of respondents agreed.

.

From stable above, 56% of respondents strongly agreed that fair use can be applied through government agencies, 40% agreed, 4% were neutral. This also shows that fair use can be applied through government agencies.

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION, SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND AREAS FOR FURTHER STUDY

5.0. Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the findings, draw conclusions to the results presented in chapter four. The chapter also contains recommendations and conclusions according to the objectives of the study. It finally ends with suggestions for further research.

5.1 Discussion of findings

5.1.1 BENEFITS OF FAIR USE APPLICATION

The results in the study indicates that proper acknowledgement of cited work has been enabled by fair use this is also shared by Black, H. C., 2008) who states that Proper Acknowledgment of Cited Works, A manuscript represents original scholarly activity. Any material taken from another source must be documented, and in no case should one present another person’s work as one’s own. East Tennessee State University uses the definition of plagiarism given in Black’s Law Dictionary.

The results indicates that fair use Encourages originality of written work this is also in line with, Kenneth, (1996) who states that the Use of Copyrighted Material  If extensive material from any previously copyrighted work is used in your manuscript beyond the “fair use” allowance, you alone are responsible for obtaining written permission from its copyright owners. The publisher usually has the authority to grant permission to quote large excerpts from the copyrighted work (see next paragraph for details), to use a figure or table from a copyrighted work, or can refer requests to the copyright owner or designated representative.

The study indicates that fair use Ensures approval from research organizations this is also in line with Zidar, (1997) who states that Approval from Research Compliance Reviews Compliance with federal regulations governing the use of human subjects, animal care, radiation, legend (proprietary) drugs, recombinant DNA, and the handling of hazardous materials in research is monitored by a number of federal agencies. Because of these regulations, research compliance is an area of importance to graduate students.

5.1.2 CHALLENGES IN APPLICATION OF FAIR USE

The results indicates that most of the respondents assert that fair use has led to a dynamic legal doctrine this is because these leads to numerous legal challenges including challenges with obtaining permission to carry out research.

The findings in the study indicates that The procedures are long in getting permission this is because most of the different countries have different legal procedures with which one can follow to make clear and follow procedures for the application of fair use. .

5.1.3 DIFFERENT WAYS OF APPLICATION OF FAIR USE.

The findings in the study indicates that scholars can apply fair use can be applied by Employing ones fair use in good faith this is also in line with Tomas, (1999), who states that Some librarians express concern that employing one’s fair use rights in good faith may inadvertently make material available for potential misuse by others. But— just as they must now—all future users will have to engage in fair use analysis for themselves and in their own context. Libraries should of course be prepared to assist students and others who have questions about how to exercise their own rights with regard to library materials, but the ultimate responsibility will lie with the user, not the library.

The study indicates that Institutions give permission to scholars for application of fair use this is also in line with Lloyd L,( 2008), who states that Perfect safety and absolute certainty are extremely rare in copyright law, as in many areas of law, and of life. Rather than sit idle until risk is reduced to zero, institutions often employ “risk management,” a healthy approach to policy making that seeks to enable important projects to go forward despite inevitable uncertainty by identifying possible risks (legal and otherwise) and reducing them to acceptable levels.

5.2 Recommendations

The study recommends that organization should adopt fair use to encourage the better and legality of the scholars work.

5.3 Conclusion

The result indicates that scholars should always use fair use to ensure that their work is protected from being duplicated.

5.4 AREAS OF FURTHER STUDY

The study recommends the following;

The influence of technology on fair use

The challenges in application of fair use

The techniques of application of fair use.

REFERENCES

Kenneth D. Crews, Princeton Univ. Press v. Michigan Document Servs., Inc.: Notes from rehearing en banc before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (1996), at http://www. iupui.edu/~copyinfo/mdshrg.html. This description also begs questions about the ability of the AAP to act on behalf of its members. In all of the discussion of guidelines as “agreements,” one must look critically at the scope of subject matter to which any party has the authority to reach agreement.

Bernard Zidar, Fair Use and the Code of the Schoolyard: Can Copyshops Compile Coursepacks Consistent with Copyright?, 46 EMORY L.J. 1363, 1406 (1997) (“The Classroom Guidelines represent a balance, struck by the House and Senate conferees and approved by Congress, between the benefit to society derived from allowing students to use certain materials fairly and the benefit which would flow from protecting the copyright holder’s monopoly.”).

A review of the cases examined in this article confirms that publishers are often the plaintiffs. Textbook publishers sued Michigan Document Services, Inc., and Kinko’s Graphics Corporation. See Princeton Univ. Press v. Mich. Document Servs., Inc., 99 F.3d 1381 (6th Cir. 1996); Basic Books, Inc. v. Kinko’s Graphics Corp., 758 F. Supp. 1522 (S.D.N.Y. 1991). Journal publishers sued Texaco Inc. See Am. Geophysical Union v. Texaco Inc. 60 F.3d 913 (2d Cir. 1995).

Tomas A. Lipinski, Designing and Using Web-Based Materials in Education: A Web Page Legal Audit–—Part I, Intellectual Property Issues, 137 WEST’S EDUC. L. REP. 9, 11 (1999) (recommends adopting the Multimedia Guidelines “to minimize potential liability”).

Lloyd L. Weinreb, Law as Order, 91 HARV. L. REV. 909, 912 (2008). See also Schauer & Wise, supra note 468, at 1093 (asserting that under positivist theories the rule of law is “source-based”). Roger A. Shiner argues that under a positivist theory, “authority” is not the same as “validity” of the law. He attributes validity to the “pedigree” of the law “by the rule of recognition of the legal system.” ROGER A. SHINER, NORM AND NATURE: THE MOVEMENTS OF LEGAL THOUGHT 24 (1992). He adds this statement about authority: “If the law has authority, then the demands that the law makes of us it has a right to make of us; its requirements are such that we ought to conform to them.” Id.

On the other hand, the fair-use guidelines could be understood by legal positivists as simply filling the gaps and resolving lingering ambiguities in the statutes from Congress: “Modern legal positivists believe that problems of legal indeterminacy (the failure of rules to guide decision-makers to correct answers) were minor difficulties in decision making that could be resolved by institutional choices based on the competency of the decision maker to resolve ambiguity in language.” See GARY MINDA, POSTMODERN LEGAL MOVEMENTS: LAW AND

JURISPRUDENCE AT CENTURY’S END 49 (1995).