This post is part of a series of resources produced by our Student Interns in Summer 2024. The content does not necessarily reflect the official position of the organization.

In July, our interns sat down over Zoom to discuss careers with a panel of library professionals working around copyright and policy: Josh Bolick, Head of the Schulenberger Office of Scholarly Communication and Copyright at the University of Kansas Libraries; Nate Hill, Executive Director of the Metropolitan New York Library Council; Pia Hunter, Associate Director for Research and Instruction at the University of Illinois College of Law; and Charlotte Roh, Publications Manager at the California Digital Library. 

The panelists’ stories called attention to the eclectic and diverse paths that can lead to librarianship, particularly in the case of copyright and scholarly communication. None of the four guests began or even finished their Bachelor’s degrees with a library career in mind. Copyright focus was likewise not part of the plan: Bolick and Roh both began to investigate the field after recommendations from mentors; and in Hunter’s case, her interest in copyright law began with on-the-job experience as part of a faculty panel addressing those issues.

In the past two decades, library scholars have begun a large-scale discussion around copyright knowledge in libraries and, in particular, the idea of a copyright specialist librarian. In 2007, Suzanne Araas Vesely published a meditation on the question “Do You Need a Copyright Librarian?”, responding to the phenomenon as an emergent career path. Nearly a decade later, Lesley Ellen Harris’ essay “Lawyer or Librarian? Who Will Answer Your Copyright Question?” still considered the copyright librarian a novel idea.

In contrast, a study of Canadian copyright specialists published a year later by Erin Patterson argues that librarians have always handled questions around copyright, but do so with more visibility today due to the flood of questions in the wake of new technologies. For a quantitative inquiry into this supposed new position, a study of job postings from 2006-2011 by Dick Kawooya, Amber Veverka, and Tomas Lipinski found a slight increase in the number of ads for jobs involving intellectual property (IP). Notably, however, this increase wasn’t seen for positions specifically mentioning “copyright,” but only for related positions in fields like scholarly communication. This supports Patterson’s assertion that the work itself has not undergone a renaissance so much as the conversation around it.

In the latter part of the 2010s, a number of papers came out investigating the prevalence of these copyright specialists in different countries. These studies skewed towards academic libraries and major institutions, but it is still noteworthy that a majority of institutions in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom reported having a copyright specialist on staff. Results may vary by region: in a 2021 study on Nigerian libraries, for instance, only 27.06% of librarians reported that there was a copyright specialist at their place of work, while 37.65% didn’t know.

While the rise of the copyright librarian may not be so dramatic as some have made out, it is clear that an understanding of IP law is a valuable skill in the 21st-century library. But how do librarians develop it?

According to our panelists’ stories, copyright knowledge was not always a formal training process, and often developed through work experience and showing an active interest in the topic. Roh shared how, after getting recommendations and attending a related panel, she applied for a fellowship and worked closely with Laura Quilter, copyright lawyer and librarian. Hunter, on the other hand, was assigned to work on a copyright committee with faculty; when she discovered her passion for the topic, she unofficially became the local go-to “copyright person” at her workplace, even before she pursued a formal legal education.

While law-trained librarians such as Hunter are an important part of the field, the copyright librarian is not defined by credentials: equally or more important is one’s willingness and excitement around handling copyright questions and active pursuit of opportunities to do so. Interestingly, a comparison of studies on copyright specialists and general librarians suggests that they are learning about copyright in the same ways. A 2017 study of UK copyright specialists by Philippa Hatch, Chris Morrison, and Jane Secker found that people in these positions do not often have a law degree (only 11%), a finding supported in the U.S. by Kawooya et al.’s observation that jobs don’t generally require it. Rather, Hatch, Morrison, and Secker found, common sources of training and information were “external training,” colleagues and networking, books, articles, and websites. In comparison, multiple studies of librarians of all types in the U.S.–Estell and Saunders (2016), Schmidt and English (2015), and an anecdotal paper by Beck and Lee (2022)–reported that librarians got copyright info from books, articles, websites, colleagues, listservs, and guides/wikis: in other words, the same sorts of sources. Copyright experts thus do not necessarily have special training beyond what regular librarians can access–they have just focused their professional work on the subject.

This division we’ve identified in the scholarship–research on copyright specialists, and research on general librarians’ dealings with copyright–raises an interesting question. Should the field’s educational priority be training specialists, or improving the copyright literacy of library professionals writ large?

According to LeEtta Schmidt and Michael English, their survey of librarians found differing opinions on whether all librarians need to know about copyright, or only certain departments. This debate in itself, however, assumes a large and diverse staff. Vesely argues that specialists are ideal but points out that not every institution will be able to retain one; therefore “all MLS programs should require a basic understanding of copyright law for every graduate.” Morrison and Secker, in a 2017 paper, raise another practical concern for overreliance on experts: the burden that this places on an individual staff member to advise on a huge volume of projects and inquiries.

The workload issue came up during the LF career panel, as well. Hunter cautioned the interns to “establish boundaries” and be wary of scope creep in their job responsibilities, commenting, “don’t get caught up in things you don’t plan to do long-term.” Published testimonials by copyright specialists raise similar concerns. Schmidt notes the way the responsibilities of their position expanded over time, while articles by Kate Dickson and Susan Beck and Norice Lee emphasize reliance on colleagues. The studies by Vesely and Hatch, Morrison, and Secker both also report frequent use of committees to distribute the work and provide support for all involved.

At the LF panel, Hill raised questions about the actual value of subfields and specialized career paths. “My whole career has been about defying specialization,” he stated, noting the value he found in rotating through different Brooklyn Public Library divisions and offices early on. As for the libraries as a whole, he added, “Specialization is maybe, in some ways, the opposite of what we need in our field right now. It’s all about bridging things and connecting things.”

How much do non-specialist librarians know about copyright? Evidence suggests that more reliable training is needed. Research in the past decade has consistently found a significant level of copyright knowledge among librarians, but not at the target level to confidently provide guidance to laypeople, and often limited to more traditional topics. These trends hold true in studies of Nigerian and American libraries, and in a 2017 multinational study.

Researchers have proposed a few avenues for closing this knowledge gap. One, of course, is incorporating more discussion of IP into library science degrees. Bolick noted for our interns that the only part of his MLIS relevant to his current work was “two weeks in an . . . information policy course–two weeks on copyright, and not in a ton of depth.” Schmidt and English examined course catalogs at U.S. MLIS programs and found that copyright instruction tended to be limited, especially in required courses, although they noted that more recent graduates in their 2015 study reported learning more about copyright. Dick Kawooya, Donna Ferullo, and Tomas Lipinski delved into syllabi from LIS courses and found only 17 classes containing their IP-related keywords out of 3,900 surveyed, all of which were electives. If copyright is a core competency for librarians, it should be mandatory for students in the field.

On the other hand, many librarians have focused instead on continuing education resources. In 2011, Marcia Keyser published an invaluable OER guide covering the basics of U.S. copyright law as is relevant to typical library workflows. Morrison and Secker have argued that this approach to copyright education is actually ideal, since paraprofessionals with no LIS training will invariably be involved; they likewise have published a UK-based web resource and learning games on copyright.

While good training materials are invaluable, one key takeaway from the LF guest panel was the human element in shaping a career. Hunter noted that “you never know how [a professional contact] might be able to connect you to something or someone later.” Roh pointed out that mentoring exists not just in formal conversations with more experienced librarians, but also in “mini-mentoring moments” that can happen with colleagues on any level. The panelists also emphasized agency. Bolick cautioned against the line of thinking “that you get a credential and then opportunities will come to you.” Hill stressed the need for leadership in the library field–a skill set which does not necessarily correspond to a career specialty, but must be fostered over time nonetheless.

While more work needs to be done on copyright literacy in library spaces, the extensive discussion apparent among scholars and professionals shows promise for the field’s ability to combat any knowledge gaps. And while standardizing copyright education may help the field, there is value in the personalized routes many library professionals have taken to discovering this fascinating area of work. During the panel, Roh shared a piece of advice she received when transitioning from academic publishing to libraries: “Librarianship is a really good second or third career, because whatever you learned in your previous job, you can take into the field.” The same, surely, is true of different work areas under the “library” umbrella.

Ultimately, in the words of of Pia Hunter, “you sometimes really have to create your own experience.”

References

Beck, S. E., & Lee, N. (2022).  Copyright buddies: Cultivating teamwork to support our copyright journey. Journal of Copyright in Education and Librarianship, 6(1), 1-7.

Dickson, K. (2022). From Law Firm to Library: Finding a Second Career as a Copyright Specialist. Journal of Copyright in Education and Librarianship, 6(1), 1-3.

Estell, A., & Saunders, L. (2016). Librarian Copyright Literacy: Self-Reported Copyright Knowledge Among Information Professionals In The United States. Public Services Quarterly, 12(3), 214–227.

Harris, L. E. (2015). Lawyer or librarian? Who will answer your copyright question?. Intellectual Property Journal, 28(1), 33.

Hatch, P., Morrison, C., & Secker, J. (2017). A study of copyright specialists in UK educational and cultural institutions: Who are they and what do they do?. Project report.

Keyser, M. W. (2011). Copyright For The Rest Of Us: A guide for people who aren't lawyers.

Kawooya, D., Veverka, a., & Lipinski, T. (2015). The Copyright Librarian: A Study of Advertising Trends for the Period 2006.2013. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41, 341-249.

Kawooya, D,, Ferullo, D., Lipinski, T. (2019). Library and Information Science Curriculum in a Changing Professional Landscape: The Case of Copyright Education in the United States. Journal of Copyright Education and Librarianship, 3(2), 1-43.

Morrison, C., & Secker, J. (2017). Understanding Librarians’ Experiences Of Copyright. Library Management, 38(6/7), 354–368.

Patterson, E. (2016). The Canadian university copyright specialist: A cross-Canada selfie. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, 11(2).

Schmidt, L. M. (  2022).    The order of success: A slow path to copyright librarianship. Journal of Copyright in Education and Librarianship, 6(1), 1-5.

Schmidt, L., & English, M. (2015). Copyright instruction in LIS programs: Report of a survey of standards in the U.S.A. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(6), 736–743.

Todorova, T. Y., Kurbanoglu, S., Boustany, J., Dogan, G., Saunders, L., Horvat, A., Terra, A. L., Landøy, A., Repanovici, A., Morrison, C., Vanderkast, E. J. S., Secker, J., Rudzioniene, J., Kortelainen, T., & Koltay, T. (2017). Information Professionals And Copyright Literacy: A Multinational Study. Library Management, 38(6/7), 323–344.

Shamsi, A., Durodolu, O. O., Vasantha, R. N., & Lund, B. D. (2021). Copyright Literacy Among Nigerian Librarians: A Survey Of Copyright Awareness, Attitudes, And Abilities. African Journal Of Library, Archives & Information Science, 31(2), 119–128.

Vesely, S. A. (2007). Do you need a copyright librarian?. Internet reference services quarterly, 11(4), 69-82.

About the Author

‍Rebecca Regan is an intern with Library Futures and is an artist and scholar whose interests include literature, language, and opera. She has worked as a music library assistant at the Peabody Institute of the Johns Hopkins University and at Swarthmore College, where she was honored to work on projects including a special collection of folk dance records and data visualization of the library's topic coverage. She holds a Master's of Music in Voice from Peabody Conservatory and a BA in English Literature from Swarthmore.