COMMONS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 2 November 1988)

§ Lord Strathclyde
My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 39.
A librarian or archivist may, under the terms of Clause 42, make replacement copies of works in a permanent collection. This may be to prevent wear and tear on a valuable original or to replace a work which has been lost or destroyed. There are, however, certain safeguards to ensure that the exception does not operate unfairly against publishers and copyright owners. For example, subsection (3) provides that the exception does not apply to items available for lending.
The exception created by this clause should have a limited applicability; otherwise it could be abused and in this respect the safeguard in subsection (3) may not be sufficient. A library wishing to obtain an extra copy of a much used reference book which is not available for lending could conceivably use this exception rather than purchase a new copy. We need to close this potential loophole but this is best done by excluding lending libraries when we come to prescribe the libraries to which Clause 42 applies rather than attempt in this clause to exclude lending copies. That is what we shall do.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, I am afraid that once again I am lost, but perhaps I may ask a question. As I understand it, the clause concerns back-up copies. The library has certain works and it wishes to make certain that it has copies of those works for fear of damage, destruction, disappearance, and so on. It may be that I simply do not follow the logic of the last remarks made by the noble Lord but I do not understand why the library has the books in the first place. I presume that the books are there to be used and read.
Are we arguing here that there is a special concept of lending so that one may go to the library and read the book and use it but in some sense it is not being loaned? There is obviously no difficulty between us as to what the noble Lord is trying to achieve. However, I am rather lost as to whether the amendments and what will come later will achieve what he is saying. Therefore, I am looking for enlightenment on that matter.

§ Lord Strathclyde
My Lords, perhaps I may repeat what I said before. This provides that the exception does not apply to items available for lending.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, I take it that "available for lending" means taking it out of the library. As always on these matters, I do not entirely trust the legal profession when it gets its hands on this issue. That would not mean that if the book was well used in the library, even though it was an important work, that would not be defined as "lending", and therefore a back-up copy of that very important work which scholars might use could be made.

§ Lord Strathclyde
My Lords, that seems to be the case. Not all books in libraries are loaned. A user of the reference library does not borrow a book but merely uses it.