Early commentary on the Georgia State copyright decision

This from a colleague:

Thanks for passing this on. Yes, indeed, one of the gray areas that persists is one that Don  and I will be trying to resolve regarding a reading we want to use in a course this fall.

Don has recommended we use one article in an edited collection (of which he is one of the editors). The article itself represents less than 10% of the edited collection, but it is a whole "chapter." So, gray area #1: Does the 10% rule apply?

Regarding the fourth factor, my understanding of the ruling indicates we should have students pay for the article if it can be made available to them "at a reasonable price." And therein lies the second gray area. What is "a reasonable price" for a 15-page article that represents 6% of a book that sells for $110.56?  What if Taylor and Francis insists on a price that seems higher than reasonable?

Dear U 2,

See the link in the message below for some of the first commentary on the decision  in the  Georgia State copyright infringement case.   It is an analysis from Kevin Smith, Scholarly Communications Officer at Duke University, who is of the opinion that the University won on the majority of legal points, but that there remain gray areas.

For early thoughts about Judge Orinda Evans's brand new ruling in the
Georgia State Case, Kevin Smith provides a good summary on his blog:

http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2012/05/12/the-gsu-decision-not-an-easy-road-for-anyone/