{"id":289,"date":"2018-09-05T00:02:10","date_gmt":"2018-09-05T00:02:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wordpress.library.illinois.edu\/scholarlycommunications\/?post_type=podcast&p=289"},"modified":"2026-01-29T16:42:12","modified_gmt":"2026-01-29T16:42:12","slug":"kyle-courtney-and-the-copyright-first-responders","status":"publish","type":"podcast","link":"https:\/\/wordpress.library.illinois.edu\/scholarlycommunications\/podcast\/kyle-courtney-and-the-copyright-first-responders\/","title":{"rendered":"Kyle Courtney and the Copyright First Responders"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"KyleCopyright First Responders Website<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcript:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Hello, and welcome to a very special ALA edition of copyright chat, recorded directly from the ALA annual conference in New Orleans Louisiana. Kyle Courtney is our guest today, and he is the copyright advisor for Harvard University, working out of the Office for Scholarly Communication. He works closely with Harvard Libraries to establish a culture of shared understanding of copyright issues among Harvard staff, faculty, and students. His work at Harvard also includes a role as the copyright and information policy advisor for HarvardX. His Copyright First Responders (CFRs) initiative was profiled in Library Journal<\/em> in 2013 and he was named a National Academic Library Mover and Shaker in 2015.<\/p>\n

Sara: Welcome! Today, I have Kyle Courtney with me in the beautiful New Orleans, Louisiana. We are here for the American Library Association annual conference and I was able to get a few minutes of his time. Amazingly, I\u2019ve been chasing him around for quite some time trying to get him on the show so welcome, Kyle.<\/p>\n

Kyle: Thank you, that\u2019s not true by the way.<\/p>\n

Sara: We do like to heckle each other so it will continue. So, Kyle I wanted to hear a little bit about your fair use evaluator project. I know I had signed up and I was getting text messages of fair use scenarios and giving some opinions, \u201cIs this a fair use? Yes\/no.\u201d And I wonder what has happened with that and what\u2019s it all about so please tell us.<\/p>\n

Kyle: Sure, absolutely. So the whole foundation of the project is that we want to expand fair use knowledge further afield than just the experts that are in libraries and lawyers currently. The idea is that more knowledge about fair use is a benefit to society in general, are to scholarship etc. A citizen should know what rights they have especially in this day and age when they\u2019re engaging with technology much more than usual so the concept was could we create a decentralized network of experts that could receive questions from the public at large and get answers about fair use so in order to do that we had a pilot at least of the program and the Knight Foundation generously granted us as part of their library news challenge to create a system (a pilot system, so to speak) that would send out every day fair use hypotheticals that we had gathered over the years and get votes on them, basically forcing the narrative to \u201cyes or no.\u201d A lot of the times lawyers and experts will answer, \u201cIt depends.\u201d I mean you\u2019ve done it, I\u2019ve done it, so conceptually how they felt, even if they\u2019re sixty, forty, you know that you\u2019re more than likely to be fair use\u2014something along those lines. So the idea was to measure this in the pilot and also play with the technology for the first time.<\/p>\n

Sara: So, that\u2019s interesting, because I thought (now this is a misunderstanding, I suppose on my part as a participant) that the idea was maybe we get a consensus of experts, and then you can kind of map out like on a spectrum you know \u201cthese things generally are fair use,\u201d \u201cthese things aren\u2019t,\u201d but your goal is to actually have, you know, every day folks be able to reach a bunch of experts to get a consensus. Is that the idea, or?<\/p>\n

Kyle: That\u2019s the end goal. So what you talked about there, first, was the result of some of the data that we didn\u2019t anticipate getting, but that was very helpful. So the first few days we sent out some real obvious \u201cyes\u201d or \u201cno\u2019s\u201d to kind of get a parameter, and then we went into more explicit kind of fair use scenarios that are taken from the news, or case law, or actual questions from the Copyright First Responders network and those were harder, but it\u2019s still gave us a measurement which I think was interesting, so the outcome of the data was just a bonus for this and we\u2019re actually doing this with\u2014 So that the Knight Found. Grant was won by myself, Jack Cushman at the Library Innovation Lab and at Harvard Law School, and Katie Ott who\u2019s now a reference librarian at Stanford Law. And we got all this data, and so we want to do something with the data too, because we had all these experts that were agreeing, so every day they got a scenario and they voted \u201cyes\u201d or \u201cno,\u201d and we\u2019ve never done that before, and I think\u2014amongst our group, amongst our experts\u2014and so we got some data, but ultimately again that idea behind here too and thanks to the Knight Foundation kind of extending this pilot we learned a little bit about how we might make a public facing version of this. We\u2019re certainly going to expand it to a larger audience. We had to (for technical reasons) keep it to approximately thirty, some were picked by me some were picked by other folks on the project, and the idea is\u2014could we scale this up in some capacity, because the technology that we had on the back end that sent texts every day, we learned about that. In fact some of the first couple days were a little rocky, because when you send the same exact scenario out over from one text number, it sets off every one\u2019s spam detection. And you know, we were looking like text spam at some point, so we had to then get individual numbers. We had to learn about the technology in doing effective crowdsourcing. Now, crowdsourcing a law is relatively new, but we thought fair use would be a good test-case. I think all of copyright would be interesting, but certainly fair use because of those factors as hypotheticals, the factual nature of this, but more often than not, we did get some good results from this which we\u2019re turning to, but then again at the same time we\u2019ve got some typical results. Whether or not fanfiction is fair use based on the hypothetical we laid out was almost split fifty-fifty. Same thing with some of the cases we had for online learning and usage of film and stuff so it was interesting to see that the hard ones still remain hard even amongst experts, but remember we\u2019re not necessarily looking for legal answers for crowdsourcing this, so the public gets educated about this, so that if we have a question that could be in the form of a drop down box or something\u2014they give us as much factual information as they could and then ask, \u201cHey you think a court would find this fair use or not\u201d or \u201cDo you think that you, personally would advise somebody that\u2019s fair use?\u201d And I think that would help them, and then if we\u2014if it\u2019s a \u201cno\u201d by 1% or 2%, we actually want to build in some educational links, so places where they can go and learn about why it\u2019s more gray\u2014you know\u2014than the simple \u201cyes\u201d or \u201cno,\u201d but also for those ones that were nearly 100% \u201cyes\u201d or nearly 100% \u201cno,\u201d there\u2019s learning there too to be had and to build in some kind of analysis in the\u2014in the thing that says \u201cwhy,\u201d would be interesting\u2014point to a case, point to a statue, or have a page that serves in the texting area so again we\u2019re experimenting with that. Ideally the public types in the question, a random group of thirty to sixty experts get it, they vote, it takes them\u2014you know\u2014five seconds to vote, most of them did it in the morning, some of the afternoon, and within twenty four hours, you get some sort of result. We think that would be helpful to help \u201cmyth-bust\u201d anything about fair use that\u2019s out there, and maybe if that expert felt like it, they could add a sentence or two if they had the time. You know the texting format as a device of sharing knowledge\u2014you know\u2014we make you know emoji\u2019s and \u201cI\u2019ll meet you there\u201d and all that, but what if we could\u2014you know\u2014reach people that way in learning about fair use that would be interesting.<\/p>\n

Sara: I think the ability to add a sentence or two is kind of key, because in those, a lot of times, people don\u2019t ask the easy questions right, I mean folks.. folks know that they can do this, that, or the other for teaching, or you know \u201cmake one copy of this,\u201d but when they get into those tougher questions, those are\u2014that\u2019s when they\u2019re wanting the help and that\u2019s when it\u2019s harder to say \u201cyes\u201d or \u201cno\u201d and you want to be able to explain yourself right.<\/p>\n

Kyle: Yeah, yeah absolutely and one of our experts was, Nancy Sims who\u2014you know\u2014she tweets just blocks of stuff, and I don\u2019t think it\u2019s a secret, because she tweeted out you know \u201cO. M. G. this \u2018Yes\/No\u2019 format is so hard!\u201d I would consider her, you know, an expert in our field of about spotting fair use. But again I think again, forcing that analysis, putting our thumb on the scale so to speak, and saying, \u201cLook if it really came down to it do you really think it\u2019s a fair use or not. I know it\u2019s against the ethical norms right? Or at least the practice that we all do or no we\u2019re never going to tell them \u201cyes or no\u201d unless it\u2019s an absolute slam dunk. But there\u2019s learning in the fact that you can say\u2014hmm, more often than not\u2026the extra\u2014We didn\u2019t want to add the extra right away, because I didn\u2019t want people to start to, you know, put a small appendices on their \u201cyes or no,\u201d you know, that you know\u2014lawyers can text all day, couldn\u2019t we\u2014you know, we used to be paid by the word, but now we write\u2014you know\u2014a lot all the time, so that ideas that I didn\u2019t want to give them room (this includes yourself because\u2014because you were an expert that joined us) that idea that like, however\u2014you know\u2014\u201cyes, but there are,\u201d \u201chowever,\u201d or you know, \u201cit depends,\u201d but I said, \u201cyes, here.\u201d I didn\u2019t want that. I wanted the real, honest, \u201cyes or no,\u201d and I think the public would understand that better.<\/p>\n

Sara: Well also that that leaves you know the question of where we\u2019re going to have a pretty big disclaimer, right? Because I\u2019m happy to say, \u201cYes this is a fair use,\u201d all day long, but in my day job as a copyright librarian, I am not allowed to do that.<\/p>\n

Kyle: You know we had a you know we had a great clause, we had made up for the future (obviously this is not publicly accessible quite yet), but that idea of like \u201cthis is an information site, this is information only, this is not legal advice\u2014you know\u2014seek your own legal advice, seek your own counsel.\u201d A number of websites in our field have that, right? That\u2019s kind of standard language. So if we ever do have this public facing dream, certainly that would be part of it, and that this is information service only. But again, much like a lot of law librarian practitioners, you know, and you and I have both worked with many law libraries in the past, they can provide information without practicing law\u2014right, you know\u2014they\u2019re walking the line. I remember learning that in my reference class. You know, that idea that you could work in a law library, and provide people with what the law, is the information, etc., and that\u2019s why the anonymity (which we didn\u2019t get to) was a critical component of this. So, no one was identifiable, it was all\u2014you know\u2014it was names of animals you know.<\/p>\n

Sara: I had a hard time even identifying my own answers, \u2018cause I got some\u2014I got some animal name, they said, \u201cThis is your name\u201d and I forgot. So I was looking at the results and saying, \u201cI wonder what I said to this?\u201d<\/p>\n

Kyle:\u00a0 Yeah, Yeah I think I was, \u201cA. Aardvark,\u201d because I was the first one, but that idea is that we didn\u2019t know who was what and that was critically important, in fact that\u2019s why a lot of people agreed to sign up and not be named. Certainly they could say I participated, but they did not\u2014we could not track their answers, and we didn\u2019t have their phone number aligned with their name, so we\u2019re very careful about that obviously. So the anonymity allowed these experts to then really weigh in (as you said) as they wouldn\u2019t in their day job, and I think that gives us another leg up on this thing actually maybe working in some capacity. You know anonymous legal counsel is kind of an interesting thing, but this is anonymous myth-busting of fair use, and you know tying what a artist, or a comic book writer, or web developer might do to the fact that they don\u2019t know enough, and could they have this pool of experts instead of\u2014you know\u2014paying three hundred an hour\u2014you know\u2014up front, maybe they learn it on their own and do this. You see this on You Tube and everywhere else all the time; people are learning and asserting fair use.<\/p>\n

Sara: That brought me to a thought about, when you were talking about saying \u201cyes, but\u201d or \u201cit depends\u201d and all of the hemming and hawing that we like to do as lawyers. I thought about that and I thought, at the end of the day the judge has to decide a clear \u201cyes\u201d or a clear \u201cno.\u201d They don\u2019t get to say, \u201cit depends,\u201d and so I think what we\u2019re doing is predictive analysis, right, of \u201cwhat would a judge do?\u201d And a judge doesn\u2019t get to\u2014you know\u2014sometimes they get to kick it back to the lower court, right, and they say, \u201cwell it\u2019s a fact question blah blah blah,\u201d but you know assuming that they\u2019re making a decision on fair itself, they don\u2019t get that\u2014you know\u2014that hemming and hawing ability so\u2026<\/p>\n

Kyle: No, no, and that\u2019s you know how the system works, right? So it\u2019s a decision has to be rendered at some point, you know. Again, I like that idea of predictive analysis, or we\u2019re getting ahead of the court case. Of course, I wish no one has to go to court for fair use ever, right? I honestly do. I wish, you know, we could have fair use to be used as it\u2019s intended to be used\u2014X. Y. Z. and not battle over it\u2014however, those battles have helped us determine the scope, especially in the modern technology century that we\u2019re living in to be able to do more than we had in the past. But again, yeah, there is no true yes or no from attorneys, but there is true \u201cyes or no\u201d from the courts and those decisions allowed us to lay a litmus test for what we think can be done. So if anything, the experts were drawing on their capacity as information professionals about copyright to then risk mitigate for the question, determine the \u201cyes or no,\u201d and then share that anonymously. I think it works well and at least we had a very high response rate we had very few dropouts. Even people were doing on vacation (which I would never ask, obviously), but the fact that it was very simple, a \u201cyes or no,\u201d usually in the morning\u2014you know\u2014via phone (which they\u2019re already on anyway) added to the success rate. I remember Jack, which was like really like, \u201cWe had an eighty-something percent response rate every time.\u201d And that\u2019s kind of amazing that we had that. And I think that could carry over into the next version that we\u2019re doing, which we\u2019re trying to expand upon, hopefully, you know. It\u2019s well into summer here, and we\u2019re\u2014you know\u2014it\u2019s one of those things where time slips away, certainly fast for both of us and Serena. But, I think this has enormous value, and so that\u2019s why I think the Knight folks have no problem with extending it. Plus we\u2019re pretty cheap, everyone\u2014you know\u2014was a friend or colleague and volunteered their \u201cyes or no\u201d for thirty days straight\u2014you know\u2014was just all of August, right (if you recall, was only for thirty days) and additionally the software wasn\u2019t really that expensive, and Jack and his team and Katie did a great job in coding and making it work and get over the technical barriers, so I think it\u2019s cost efficient too, so we get a high value for\u2014you know\u2014learning and understanding fair use for a relatively low bar for time and cost<\/p>\n

Sara: \u00a0I think it\u2019s fabulous project. I was really excited to be involved in it and I\u2019m excited to see where it goes. What I\u2019d love to see, and maybe you already are considering this, is after the project continues with actual patrons or users, asking questions or the public in general, that at some point we have kind of or an article written up about a synopsis of like, \u201chere\u2019s what we\u2019re finding,\u201d right, with all these questions and answers, like here\u2019s some summaries of all of that what experts think about fair use.<\/p>\n

Kyle: Yes\u2026 So, you know once we start getting the data then we look at it we\u2019re like\u2014wow, this is, we should harness this in some capacity or do something with it! Yes there is a woefully neglected draft that we\u2019ve shared amongst ourselves from the previous time and we revisited it a little bit this year during the fair use week symposium at which the Knight foundation also let us talk about this project and sponsored some of that regard. So we were excited to kind of reintroduce ourselves to the project like, \u201cThis was good! Why did we write this up?\u201d So the plan is to write it up, and to kind of forecast on where we see this thing going, and then actually the article would be the road map to trying out this thing which might be public facing. Although, I think at first, we will do much like we test it with the experts will do a \u201ctest public\u201d so to speak, and it will select\u2014you know\u2014a dozen or so people to do this. The interface is what\u2019s critical there. So, certainly the thirty days of fair use scenarios we did, we chose for reasons that are pedagogical (if you will)\u2014you know\u2014easy ones at first, then harder ones, and thematic then we actually by the experts submit some. And we made them so that they could be answered \u201cyes or no,\u201d right (so we had to, but to cull them and edit them a little bit), but it worked\u2014it worked well. If we got just a straight text from the public at large\u2014you know\u2014that would be tougher because\u2014you know\u2014like the reference interview you wait to the last question to really know what they\u2019re asking, so, we were thinking at the time period of\u2014oh, maybe a drop down menu and they select a type of medium, type of use, type of thing, and then they put in the facts necessary and they put in the data or something. Something where we could then craft that or maybe could be automatically crafted (we\u2019re not sure) into that tight little hypothetical that we had for you every day during those thirty days in August.<\/p>\n

Sara: You know, I\u2019m thinking you\u2019re going to involve some crafting there, yeah probably not automatic, because also, I\u2019ve had that experience, with a kind of copyright reference interviewer where you know, they have a question and they don\u2019t even realize maybe it the copyright question, someone else identifies it as a copyright question it gets to me, and then I have to identify exactly what they\u2019re trying to do, what they\u2019re\u2014you know\u2014what their real question is so it\u2019s a lot of culling.<\/p>\n

Kyle: So that\u2019s why we thought the\u2014with the\u2014when we first pitched this with the Knight foundation would the libraries be the medium interactor between the public and the experts? So it comes into a library, because\u2014you know\u2014that\u2019s the whole idea behind this was that\u2014jeeze, libraries\u2014if they don\u2019t have experts like us on campus\u2014you know\u2014or are still getting copyright questions at the front desk, or the circulation desk, interlibrary loan, you know the reference, to special collections, technical services, so what if they could take in some of the public\u2019s questions (cull it maybe, because they\u2019re information professionals, often language professionals), and then dump it into our system and then they can get a direct response. So maybe that culling is done by librarians and information professionals that are receiving his questions\u2014that would be helpful, because we\u2014they\u2019d be more likely (especially if they\u2019re trained on the system) to know what quick facts, what quick summary, and what information would be needed to make a successful \u201cyes or no\u201d hypothetical.<\/p>\n

Sara: I think that\u2019s right, and I think that might be the way to go, but it will be interesting to see how this develops going forward. And speaking of the reference desk, ILL services\u2014copyright is everywhere. You and I know this, and I think more and more libraries are realizing this, because they\u2019re hiring more copyright specialists, but not everyone has the funding to hire someone specifically to do copyright, and so I\u2019m really impressed with your Copyright First Responders program. I wanted to give you a chance to kind of talk about that for a minute. What is that about? What\u2019s the goal? Tell us all about that..<\/p>\n

Kyle: The goal is to put myself out of business. That\u2019s the goal\u2014that idea that my brain gets shared with the world over time drastically. But, no, for real the same problem that I just outlined like libraries are getting copyright questions, it doesn\u2019t matter what type, where they are, or what department. We, five years ago, did the first cohort of the Copyright First Responders, which again was decentralized expertise across the libraries at Harvard for answering frontline copyright questions\u2014again finding the absolute green lights in some area, understanding better about public domain and copyright and fair use and section 108 libraries and archives exceptions, you know specialized training, because we think the librarians that are at the front lines are in the best position to answer questions from their community. So I\u2019m not an art librarian, I\u2019m not a photo librarian, I\u2019m not an archivist; those folks know their communities best, they know the publishers, they know the databases, they know licenses, they know the practices, often they know the materials, or what the questions are going to be asked about the materials. So they\u2019re in the best position, and half of them have masters or PhD\u2019s in these topics, so why not just layer on copyright expertise on top of all the expertise they already have, and they\u2019ll be in the best position to answer that and that\u2019s that frontline. The triage is the next level\u2014you know\u2014folks like you and I, that are there to kind of answer the harder ones, but the harder ones also serve as a methodology of teaching, and it seemed to work at Harvard well. And then I was invited to\u2014you know, kind of the \u201cJohnny Appleseed\u201d of Copyright First Responders\u2014go to other places in the United States. Now what was interesting was I didn\u2019t foresee it working elsewhere other than in this school with\u2014you know\u2014most libraries. However, I just returned from the Pacific Northwest, where we did bootcamp-style Copyright First Responder sessions and the Orbis Cascade Alliance (which is a consortia group of libraries across multiple states in that region) won a grant to bring me out to do this. And so they founded the Copyright First Responders Pacific Northwest. They have a logo and everything, just like we have a logo and graduation and patches and all the fun stuff that comes along with completing this. They have set up a regional version of this, which is very exciting. And so, much like the Copyright First Responders Harvard, they have a tiered structure, they have a closed list serve in which they can talk about stuff and they can learn, but what\u2019s really interesting about the difference between having a single school\u2014a single school can have a policy, right, and so we can come up\u2014you know\u2014five years Copyright First Responders, we know where the good green lights are, we know what our community feels like. However, Orbis Cascade Alliance and the Copyright First Responders Pacific Northwest are all at separate institutions, so they\u2019re sharing what they\u2019re doing at their separate institutions and they may not be the same, but certainly that\u2019s a great learning and valued experience and in that they\u2019re working this particular topic\u2014copyright and that they\u2019re sharing. Oh, \u201chere\u2019s how we do our stickers on our printers. Here\u2019s how we handle certain pages request. Here\u2019s how our digitization,\u201c you know \u201csearch for the public domain.\u201d Some are more like, \u201cOh, now we finally can talk about fair use in some capacity.\u201d So they\u2019ve all had gains and so far it\u2019s going very well. So shout out to the Copyright First Responders Pacific Northwest, other schools, and consortia who have had interest. I did one here last year in New Orleans, they wanted to do a citywide copyright first responders, and I mean I\u2019m actually here talking about that with people now that I\u2019m back in town so that would be interesting because that was a collaboration of museums archives and libraries in New Orleans that needed the same help as everyone else. So I think the model works: decentralized expertise across a series of places, and I think the tear model helps, and I think the closed network of sharing information helps, and it all helps the learning. Again, this is what it\u2019s all about\u2014teaching, learning, and then making those communities myth-busters so to speak on\u2014you know\u2014they\u2019re still out there\u2014yeah, every place has the same questions\u2014you know\u2014thirty seconds, automatically fair use; thirty-one seconds, automatically infringement. Yeah, \u201cwhere does that come from?\u201d You know, I would try to track that myth, but that idea is that just some of those basic things and \u201chave you talked about this recently?\u201d You know, sometimes you still need the basics\u2014the 101\u2019s are as critical as anything, because that sets the tone for the more advanced questions. So again, this Copyright First Responders network, I believe is working so far and will continue to spread, so coming soon to a place near you, maybe.<\/p>\n

Sara: You have\u2014do you have like online repository too?<\/p>\n

Kyle: So what.. we don\u2019t yet, but because we have so many starting up in so many different regions, and people are talking, I am booking in 2019, already well enough to come and do this. Emily Kilcer, who was project coordinator at the O. S. C. where I work, and myself have written a \u201cbest practices to forming a copyright first responders group\u201d up it\u2019s very informal, but it\u2019s just like stuff we\u2019ve seen and run into. And now that I\u2019ve done this regional one, I\u2019ve gone back to edit, because of course I was assuming, \u201cOh, at a school only, or a place with multiple libraries in the district\u201d but now I want to\u2014you know\u2014put in pointers for those that want to do it in a region. Most recently, the State of Rhode Island had been to a similar boot camp down there and wouldn\u2019t it be interesting, we were talking, about having a statewide copyright first responders? And again, these are things I had not considered before and that\u2019s why I think\u2014I think the model works, because it\u2019s adaptable\u2014you know\u2014everyone\u2019s going to choose their own. So we\u2019re hoping to release this best practices guide by the end of the summer and make a place where all this can live and people can cooperate and collaborate, maybe. Wouldn\u2019t it be amazing if all of these regions and schools collaborate on a really big\u2026some kind of mega-listserv or website? Now, it\u2019s down the road a bit, but certainly I don\u2019t think it can harm anyone. If anything, it could serve as a source of more education in our reach. As you know, we can never get enough, right? I think every time you and I go to a place, and we lecture, if it\u2019s a small class or a large conference, there\u2019s a gain for our community in that.<\/p>\n

Sara: Well I\u2019ve seen at least part of the Copyright First Responders program first hand. Kyle came to the University of Illinois and talked about fair use, and I couldn\u2019t get the librarians stop raving about it. I said, \u201cI\u2019m here, let me talk next time!\u201d They said, \u201cWe want Kyle back.\u201d<\/p>\n

Kyle: But, you know what, however you have saved me, because the data you pulled from that actually proves that I can teach people, because the curve went up, right? They actually learned.<\/p>\n

Sara: Exactly. Yep. Everybody learned.<\/p>\n

Kyle: Yes, yes.<\/p>\n

Sara: \u2026.and it was\u2014and it was very empowering for people, so you know I highly recommend Kyle\u2019s program. If anyone has questions, you can reach out to him. He\u2019s a very friendly guy, he\u2019s very busy (very, very busy).<\/p>\n

Kyle: Not too busy though to talk the good stuff<\/p>\n

Sara: Yes that\u2019s right, that\u2019s right. So, Kyle thank you so much for talking with me. I really always enjoy talking about copyright with you, of course, and I look forward to your projects now and in the future.<\/p>\n

Kyle: Thanks so much.<\/p>\n

Music credit<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Copyright First Responders Website Transcript: Hello, and welcome to a very special ALA edition of copyright chat, recorded directly from the ALA annual conference in New Orleans Louisiana. Kyle Courtney is our guest today, and he is the copyright advisor for Harvard University, working out of the Office for Scholarly Communication. He works closely with […]","protected":false},"author":83,"featured_media":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"episode_type":"audio","audio_file":"http:\/\/flash.atlas.illinois.edu\/media\/lib\/CopyrightChatPodcast\/CopyrightChatPodcast_Courtney.mp3","podmotor_file_id":"","podmotor_episode_id":"","cover_image":"","cover_image_id":"","duration":"","filesize":"26.5M","filesize_raw":"","date_recorded":"2018-09-05 00:02:10","explicit":"","block":""},"tags":[],"series":[11],"class_list":["post-289","podcast","type-podcast","status-publish","hentry","series-copyright-chat"],"acf":[],"episode_featured_image":false,"episode_player_image":"https:\/\/wordpress.library.illinois.edu\/scholarlycommunications\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/98\/2024\/02\/chat_orange_1400.png","download_link":"https:\/\/wordpress.library.illinois.edu\/scholarlycommunications\/podcast-download\/289\/kyle-courtney-and-the-copyright-first-responders.mp3","player_link":"https:\/\/wordpress.library.illinois.edu\/scholarlycommunications\/podcast-player\/289\/kyle-courtney-and-the-copyright-first-responders.mp3","audio_player":null,"episode_data":{"playerMode":"dark","subscribeUrls":{"apple_podcasts":{"key":"apple_podcasts","url":"","label":"Apple Podcasts","class":"apple_podcasts","icon":"apple-podcasts.png"},"stitcher":{"key":"stitcher","url":"","label":"Stitcher","class":"stitcher","icon":"stitcher.png"},"google_podcasts":{"key":"google_podcasts","url":"","label":"Google Podcasts","class":"google_podcasts","icon":"google-podcasts.png"},"spotify":{"key":"spotify","url":"","label":"Spotify","class":"spotify","icon":"spotify.png"}},"rssFeedUrl":"https:\/\/wordpress.library.illinois.edu\/scholarlycommunications\/feed\/podcast\/copyright-chat","embedCode":"

Kyle Courtney and the Copyright First Responders<\/a><\/blockquote>