November 2012

The Library of Congress 

National Recording Preservation Plan

December 2012

Council on Library and Information Resources

and The Library of Congress
The Library of Congress 

National Recording 

Preservation Plan

Council on Library and Information Resources

 and The Library of Congress

Washington, D.C.

National Recording 

Preservation Board

OF THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

National 

Recording Registry

from last round:

revised:

National Recording 

Preservation Board

OF THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

December 2012

Sponsored by the
ISBN 978-1-932326-44-4 CLIR Publication No. 156

Copublished by: 

and

Additional copies are available for $25 each. Orders must be placed through CLIR’s Web site. 

This publication is also available online at no charge at http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub156.

 The paper in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard 

 for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials ANSI Z39.48-1984.

U.S. Government Work not subject to copyright in the United States

8

The National Recording Preservation Board

The National Recording Preservation Board was established at the Library of Congress by the National Recording Preservation Act of 

2000. Among the provisions of the law are a directive to the Board to study and report on the state of sound recording preservation in the 

United States. More information about the National Recording Preservation Board can be found at http://www.loc.gov/rr/record/nrpb/.

This project was coordinated by Brenda Nelson-Strauss under 

contract with the Library of Congress.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan / sponsored by the National Recording Preservation Board of the 

Library of Congress.

 pages cm. -- (CLIR publication ; No. 156)

 “This plan was written by Brenda Nelson-Strauss, Alan Gevinson, and Sam Brylawski, under the direction of Patrick Loughney”--

Acknowledgments.

 Includes bibliographical references and index.

 ISBN 978-1-932326-44-4 (alk. paper)

1. Sound recordings--Conservation and restoration--United States. 2. Sound recordings--Digitization--United States. 3. Digital 

preservation--United States. 4. Sound recording libraries--United States. 5. Sound archives--United States. 6. Copyright--Sound 

recordings--United States. 7. Copyright and digital preservation--United States. 8. Fair use (Copyright)--United States. 9. National 

Recording Preservation Board (U.S.) I. Nelson-Strauss, Brenda. II. Brylawski, Samuel. III. Gevinson, Alan. IV. National Recording 

Preservation Board (U.S.)

 Z701.3.S68L53 2013

 025.8’4--dc23

 2012044531

Council on Library and Information Resources

1707 L Street NW, Suite 650

Washington, DC 20036

Web site at http://www.clir.org

The Library of Congress

101 Independence Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20540

Web site at http://www.loc.gov

Cover images: All photographs are from the collections of the Library of Congress. 

(top row, left to right) Thomas Edison and his tinfoil phonograph, April 1878, Brady-Handy Photograph Collection, Prints and Photographs 

Division; Rosario Bourdon conducting the Victor Orchestra in an acoustic recording session, ca. 1915-1920, Motion Picture, Broadcasting and 

Recorded Sound Division; William P. Gottlieb, photographer, Sarah Vaughan at Café Society (Downtown), New York, ca. September 1946, 

William P. Gottlieb Collection, Music Division. 

(center row, left to right) Mary Margaret McBride broadcasting with five of the 1950 “Women of the Year” chosen by women’s editors of U.S. 

newspapers, (from left) Dorothy Roe (in charge of the poll), Millicent Carey McIntosh (education), Pearl Buck (literature), Gloria Swanson 

(cinema), Vivian Kellems (business), and Mary Margaret McBride (radio), December 6, 1950, Mary Margaret McBride Collection, Motion 

Picture, Broadcasting and Recorded Sound Division; President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Prints and Photographs Division; John Vachon, 

photographer, daughter of FSA (Farm Security Administration) rehabilitation borrower listening to phonograph, Crawford County, Illinois, 

May 1940, FSA/OWI Collection, Prints and Photographs Division. 

(bottom row, left to right) An archivist at a U.S. Office of War Information (OWI) studio in London during World War II shelves an ABSIE 

(American Broadcasting Station in Europe) 16-inch lacquer-coated instantaneous disc, the standard format for recording radio broadcasts 

at the time, ca. 1944-1945, OWI Collection, Prints and Photographs Division; Library of Congress Recording Laboratory engineers Jerome 

Wiesner (foreground) and John R. Langenegger (rear) examining grooves of a record while it is being cut on a Scully recording machine 

(Wiesner became the science advisor to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, and the president of MIT), ca. 1940, Manuscript Division; Eugene 

DeAnna, photographer, audio preservation specialist Patrick Smetanick reformatting audio at the Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation, Library of Congress, October 2012, Motion Picture, Broadcasting and Recorded Sound Division.
iii

Contents

National Recording Preservation Plan Task Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii 

Foreword by the Librarian of Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii 

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 

1. Building the National Sound Recording Preservation Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

 Physical and Digital Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

 Recommendation 1.1: Recorded Sound Media Storage Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

 Recommendation 1.2: Expansion of the National Capacity for 

 Audio Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

 Recommendation 1.3: Digital Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

 Educational and Professional Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

 Recommendation 1.4: University Courses and Degree Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

 Recommendation 1.5: Continuing Education in Audio Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

 Recommendation 1.6: Audio Preservation Resource Directory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

 A National Technology Research Agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

 Recommendation 1.7: New Technologies for Audio Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

 Recommendation 1.8: Documentation of Legacy Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2. Blueprint for Implementing Preservation Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

 Audio Preservation Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

 Recommendation 2.1: Guide to Audio Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

 Recommendation 2.2: Appraisal of Audio Collections for Preservation . . . . . . . . . 21

 Recommendation 2.3: Public-Private Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

 New Tools and Guidelines for Preserving Digital Audio Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

 Recommendation 2.4: Preservation Workflows for Audio Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

 Recommendation 2.5: Metadata Standards for Digital Audio Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

 Recommendation 2.6: Tools to Support Preservation throughout the 

 Content Life Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

 Recommendation 2.7: Best Practices for Creating and Preserving 

 Born-Digital Audio Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

3. Promoting Broad Public Access for Educational Purposes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

 Ensuring Access through Discovery and Cataloging Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

 Recommendation 3.1: National Discography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

 Recommendation 3.2: National Directory of Recorded Sound Collections . . . . . . . 37

 Recommendation 3.3: Establishment of Best Practices for Audio

 Cataloging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
iv

 Copyright Legislation Reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

 Recommendation 3.4: Federal Copyright Protection for Pre-1972 

 Sound Recordings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

 Recommendation 3.5: Orphan Works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

 Recommendation 3.6: Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

 Improving Legal Public Access to Recorded Sound Collections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

 Recommendation 3.7: Licensing Agreements for Streaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

 Recommendation 3.8: Recorded Sound Preservation Access Network . . . . . . . . . . 56

 Recommendation 3.9: Sound Recording Labels Ownership Database . . . . . . . . . . . 58

 Recommendation 3.10: Expansion of Public Access to Sound Recordings 

 Preserved by the Library of Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

 Recommendation 3.11: Code of Best Practices in Fair Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

4. Long-Term National Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

 Recommendation 4.1: The National Recording Preservation Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

 Recommendation 4.2: Executive Leadership Committee on Recorded Sound 

 Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

 Recommendation 4.3: A Coordinated National Collections Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

 Recommendation 4.4: Preservation of Twenty-First Century Recordings . . . . . . . . . . . 70

 Recommendation 4.5: Fundraising for Sound Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

 Recommendation 4.6: Assessment of the National Audio Preservation Program . . . . 74

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
v

Education, Professional Training 

and Research

Robert Heiber (Chair)

Chace Audio by Deluxe

Aaron Bittel

Ethnomusicology Archive

University of California, Los Angeles

Ellen Cunningham-Kruppa

Kilgarlin Center for the Preservation of the 

 Cultural Record 

University of Texas at Austin

Gary Marchionini

School of Information and Library Science 

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

George Massenburg

Schulich School of Music, McGill University

Konrad Strauss

Jacobs School of Music, Indiana University

Digital Audio Preservation and Standards 

George Blood (Chair)

Safe Sound Archive

Michael T. Casey

Archives of Traditional Music, Indiana University

Carl Fleischhauer

National Digital Information Infrastructure and 

 Preservation Program, Library of Congress

Andy Kolovos

Vermont Folklife Center

Chris Lacinak

AudioVisual Preservation Solutions

John Spencer

BMS/Chace LLC

Copyright, Preservation and Public Access

David Seubert (Chair)

Special Collections, Davidson Library 

University of California, Santa Barbara

Tim Brooks

Association for Recorded Sound Collections

Peter Hirtle

Scholarly Resources and Special Collections 

Cornell University Library

Philip Ponella

William and Gayle Cook Music Library 

Indiana University

Eric Schwartz

Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP

Siva Vaidhyanathan

Department of Media Studies, University of Virginia

Public-Private Partnerships: Collective 

Strategies for Preservation

Bill Ivey (Chair)

Curb Center for Art, Enterprise and Public Policy 

Vanderbilt University

Sam Brylawski

University of California, Santa Barbara

Stephen Davison

Digital Library Program 

University of California, Los Angeles

Glenn Korman

Sony Music Entertainment

Marc Morgenstern

Concord Music Group

John Simson

SoundExchange

Paul West

Universal Music Group

This plan was written by Brenda Nelson-Strauss, Alan Gevinson, and 

Sam Brylawski, under the direction of Patrick Loughney.

National Recording Preservation Plan Task Forces

The recommendations in this plan derive from the work of six task forces convened by the Library of Congress. 

The Library is greatly indebted to the members of these groups for their time and the care and creativity they 

devoted to this project.
vi

Collection Management

Virginia Danielson (Chair) 

Eda Kuhn Loeb Music Library 

Harvard University

Marcos Sueiro Bal

Masterdisk

Bonna J. Boettcher

Sidney Cox Library of Music and Dance 

Cornell University

Caitlin Hunter

Recorded Sound Processing Unit, Packard 

 Campus for Audio Visual Conservation 

Library of Congress

Andy Lanset

Archives, WNYC and WQXR 

New York Public Radio

Abby Smith Rumsey

Consultant, Library of Congress National Digital 

 Information Infrastructure and Preservation 

 Program

Council on Library and Information Resources

Donald J. Waters

The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation 

Fundraising and Promoting the 

Public Awareness of Recorded Sound 

Preservation

Patrick Loughney (Chair)

Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation 

Library of Congress

Gary Giddins

Author

Jon Kertzer

Ethnomusicologist; National Recording 

Preservation Foundation

Kristen Madsen

Grammy Foundation

Deanie Parker

Soulsville Foundation

Terry Stewart

Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum

Brenda Nelson-Strauss

Director, Library of Congress National 

Recording Preservation Plan

Indiana University
vii

Library of Congress staff

Peter Alyea

Matthew Barton

Eric Breitung

Eugene DeAnna

Fenella France

Caitlin Hunter

Steve Leggett

Gregory Lukow

Laura Maddox

Marsha Maguire

Cary O’Dell

Elizabeth Pugh

Donna Ross

David Sager

Nancy Seeger

Roberta Shaffer

Gail Sonnemann

Mark Sweeney

Emily Vartanian

Chris Weston

Michele Youket

Special thanks for assistance

Rob Bamberger

Brandon Butler

Elizabeth Cohen

Sarah Cunningham

Jon Dunn

David Francis

Eric Harbeson

Steve Hobaica

D. J. Hoek

David Hughes

Bruce Iglauer

Peter Jaszi

Brian Leney

Jerry McBride

Jenn Riley

Ronda Sewald

Kathlin Smith

Steven Smolian

Acknowledgments

The writers of the National Recording Preservation Plan would like to thank 

the members of the task forces for their reports that formed the basis of this 

plan and the following individuals who assisted in the creation of the plan.

Special thanks to Eugene DeAnna, Carl Fleischhauer, Fenella France, Caitlin 

Hunter, Konrad Strauss, Emily Vartanian, and Chris Weston for their contributions to the final version of the plan.
viii

Foreword by the Librarian of Congress

National Recording Preservation Act of 2000, SEC. 111. ESTABLISHMENT 

OF PROGRAM BY LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS. [Public Law No: 106-474]

(a) IN GENERAL—The Librarian shall . . . implement a comprehensive national 

sound recording preservation program, in conjunction with other sound recording 

archivists, educators and historians, copyright owners, recording industry 

representatives, and others involved in activities related to sound recording 

preservation, and taking into account studies conducted by the Board.

American creativity has transformed the soundscape of much of the world. 

The Library of Congress has capped its long leadership in preserving 

America’s audiovisual heritage by completing and publishing its first-ever 

National Recording Preservation Plan. 

The Library of Congress’s history of active leadership in this field began 

in the early years of the twentieth century. With the passage of the National 

Recording Preservation Act of 2000, Congress reaffirmed this leadership and 

directed its Library to plan and coordinate a national effort to develop policies and programs to save our nation’s recorded sound history and ensure its 

accessibility to future generations. At a time when libraries and other cultural 

institutions, as well as the recording industry, are struggling to save more 

than 130 years of analog recording history and navigate the technical and 

marketplace challenges of providing public access in the digital age, the publication of this plan is a timely as well as historic achievement. 

The National Recording Preservation Plan is the cumulative result of 

more than a decade of work by the Library and the National Recording Preservation Board. It is America’s first significant step toward organizing an effective national collaboration to meet the challenges of saving our recorded 

sound cultural patrimony. 

The National Recording Preservation Plan follows upon the Library’s 

fulfillment of other mandates that Congress assigned to its Library in the 

National Recording Preservation Act of 2000. Since then, the Library of Congress has laid the foundation for the plan and increased public awareness of 

the need to preserve our nation’s recorded sound history and culture. Those 

mandates included the establishment of the National Recording Preservation 

Board in 2002; annual announcements of the National Recording Registry 

starting in 2003; from 2005 to 2009, the publication of five landmark studies 

on specific issues affecting sound recording preservation and access; and in 

2010, the publication of The State of Recorded Sound Preservation in the United 

States: A National Legacy at Risk in the Digital Age, the first comprehensive survey of recorded sound preservation in America ever undertaken.
ix

Digital technologies have fundamentally changed our lives in the twentyfirst century. In the born-digital age, file-based recording has become the 

predominant means of audio production, and digital audio files now are accepted as the standard format for preserving analog recordings. The State of 

Recorded Sound Preservation in the United States called attention to the great opportunities and challenges that the digital age has brought us. At the click of 

a mouse, listeners can hear music and talk from the far corners of the world. 

Digital technologies now aid preservation reformatting significantly. Yet, as 

the study acknowledged, great challenges—technical, organizational, and 

economic—that have accompanied the shift to digital preservation remain 

unresolved. The National Recording Preservation Plan recommends that collaboration among all stakeholders will be needed to take full advantage of 

the promise of the digital revolution and confront the daunting challenges of 

recorded sound preservation.

The major findings of the study showed that the challenges to saving 

America’s recorded sound history in the digital age can be generally divided 

into four categories: conservation and preservation reformatting; barriers to 

public access; the need for professional education; and outdated laws that impede both preservation and access. Based on these findings, the Library enlisted Brenda Nelson-Strauss of Indiana University to direct the effort to develop a collaborative national plan and coordinate the work of six task force 

groups charged with developing specific recommendations in the areas of 

education, professional training, and research; digital audio preservation and 

technical standards; copyright and public access; public-private partnerships; 

collection management; and fundraising and promoting public awareness of 

recorded sound preservation.

The members of the task forces included experts from public and private 

institutions and organizations across the country in the fields of law, audio 

preservation, library/archive management and public service, business, digital technology, and cultural history. Working independently and on a voluntary basis, the task force members found time in their busy schedules for 

many conference calls over a period of more than a year. 

The multi-talented staff at the Library of Congress distilled the preliminary recommendations of the task forces down to the 32 recommendations 

presented in this plan. These recommendations are thematically organized 

under headings for:

• Building the national sound recording preservation infrastructure

• Blueprint for implementing preservation strategies

• Promoting broad public access for educational purposes

• Long-term national strategies

In coordinating, guiding, and recording the proceedings of task force 

meetings, Ms. Nelson-Strauss was assisted by the Library’s dedicated staff 

that works with the National Recording Preservation Board: Steve Leggett, 

Cary O’Dell, and Donna Ross. All of us are grateful to Ms. Nelson-Strauss 

for directing the development of this study, and to Alan Gevinson and Sam 

Brylawski for writing the plan with her. I want to single out Mr. Brylawski for 

special praise for his tireless and effective leadership in the field of recorded 

sound history and preservation over many years, and for his valuable assistance to me and the work of the National Recording Preservation Board. I 
x

also thank the many task force members from across the country who volunteered their time and contributed so many important ideas; the members of 

the National Recording Preservation Board; and Gene DeAnna and his staff 

of the Library’s Recorded Sound Section at the Packard Campus for Audio 

Visual Conservation.

The Library’s efforts to advance the national cause of recorded sound 

preservation took a quantum leap forward in 2007 when the Packard Humanities Institute donated to the Library of Congress—and the American 

people—the $200 million Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation. 

This state-of-the-art facility, located in Culpeper, Virginia, was designed and 

constructed under the personal direction of David Woodley Packard for the 

purpose of preserving the Library’s unparalleled audiovisual collections and 

to assist institutions throughout the country that are equally committed to 

preserving and providing public access to our national moving image and 

recorded sound cultural heritage.

The effort to develop this national plan has been long and challenging. 

America’s audio history has been vast, creative, and decentralized since the 

nineteenth century. Conceiving a national plan involves taking into account 

the concerns and interests of many public and private stakeholders. 

Saving America’s recorded sound history and culture will require a concerted effort lasting many years. Keep in mind while reading the plan that its 

recommendations require a deliberately long view. The Library published its 

national plan for preserving the nation’s film heritage in 1994. Great progress 

has since been made in implementing its recommendations, but the efforts 

continue, much remains to be done, and similar long-term commitment and 

collaboration will be necessary to achieve many of the recommendations in 

the National Recording Preservation Plan. 

A national consensus has now been achieved in identifying the problems 

to be solved. If individuals and institutions in the public and private sectors 

commit to working together to implement the prudent recommendations of 

this broad-based national plan, we can save our recorded sound heritage for 

future generations. 

 —James H. Billington

 Librarian of Congress
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 1

Executive Summary 

The nation’s libraries, archives, and museums hold some 46 

million sound recordings, millions of which are in need of 

preservation. Millions of additional recordings, often unique 

and also in need of preservation, are held by record companies, 

performing artists, broadcasters, and collectors. In the digital age, 

new technology offers great promise for preservation initiatives. 

Transitioning to digital audio preservation, however, has created significant technical, organizational, and funding challenges for those 

institutions responsible for preserving recorded sound history for 

future generations. 

The National Recording Preservation Plan has been devised to 

provide a blueprint to “implement a comprehensive national sound 

recording preservation program,” as mandated in the National Recording Preservation Act of 2000. Congress specified that the program established by the Librarian of Congress under this legislation 

“shall ... increase accessibility of sound recordings for educational 

purposes.” Preserved recordings can benefit the public only if they 

are made available for listening. Technological, institutional, and legal impediments to broadened access create daunting challenges for 

the national preservation effort. This plan identifies the audio field’s 

most important preservation and access problems and offers recommendations for surmounting them.

Congress recognized that a national sound recording preservation program should be implemented through a concerted effort 

involving, in addition to the Library of Congress, “other sound 

recording archivists, educators and historians, copyright owners, 

recording industry representatives, and others involved in activities 

related to sound recording preservation, and taking into account 

studies conducted by the Board.” This plan, derived in large part 

from landmark studies commissioned by the National Recording 

Preservation Board and published as a result of the National Recording Preservation Act, emphasizes that coordination among public 

and private stakeholders in the recorded sound community will be 

essential for achieving a successful national sound recording preservation program.

The National Recording Preservation Plan’s recommendations 

for implementing a coordinated preservation effort fall into four 

interrelated categories: preservation infrastructure, preservation 

strategies, access challenges, and long-term national strategies for 

preservation and access. Some recommendations can be achieved in 

the near future. Long-term initiatives may take a generation.
2 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

Preservation Infrastructure

Most of the nation’s audio collections are stored under conditions 

that contribute to their deterioration. Many endangered analog for-

mats must be digitized within the next 15 or 20 years before further 

degradation makes preservation efforts all but impossible. Coordi-

nated efforts are needed to expand the physical infrastructure nec-

essary to store recorded sound collections at low temperature and 

humidity in order to slow down the deterioration process. Develop-

ing digital reformatting and storage capabilities sufficient to meet the 

preservation challenge can be achieved only through coordinated 

efforts to use existing facilities more efficiently and to develop new 

ones. 

Educational programs must be created to train specialists to 

work in these facilities. An Audio Preservation Resource Directory 

website will support educational initiatives, keep professionals 

informed of latest developments in the field, and increase public 

awareness about recording history and preservation challenges. A 

coordinated research agenda must be maintained to support the de-

velopment of new technologies in order to meet some of audio pres-

ervation’s most difficult challenges.

Preservation Strategies

Digital audio files have become the accepted preservation format for 

analog recordings at risk of deteriorating. The nature of digital files 

and digital file storage necessitates ongoing, active management that 

begins early in the lifecycle of files and requires continuing attention. 

Collection managers will need strategies, models, and guidelines to 

help them adhere to best practices, determine priorities for digitiza-

tion, and form public-private partnerships to allow them to costeffectively engage in expensive reformatting initiatives. New tools, 

implementation models, and efficient workflows will be needed to 

help engineers and managers from a variety of organizations meet 

standards and best practices for creating preservation-quality digital 

files and testing the performance of systems. Hardware and software 

developers, working with guidelines established by the preservation 

community, can aid the preservation effort by incorporating stan-

dardized metadata schemas that are cross-platform and enduring, 

and creating digital audio files that are “born archival” (i.e., files for-

matted for archiving at the time of their creation). Open source audio 

preservation software can play synergistic roles in relation to core 

systems developed by commercial entities. The preservation com-

munity should collaboratively develop management strategies and 

practical operational procedures to help recorded sound collection 

managers and technicians meet the challenges of digital preserva-

tion. These goals can be furthered through resources included in the 

Audio Preservation Resource Directory website and by efforts led by 

other national organizations. 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 3

Access Challenges

In the digital age, many technological barriers to access have disappeared; yet, expanding access to audio recordings remains problematic. There is currently no efficient way for researchers or the general 

public to discover what sound recordings exist and where they can 

be found. Despite the development of the Internet, few historical recordings can be made available online legally because of idiosyncrasies in the U.S. copyright law. Federal copyright protection does not 

apply to recordings produced before February 15, 1972, leaving them 

subject to a complex network of disparate state laws. For so-called 

“orphan works,” copyright owners cannot be identified or located. 

Many rights holders have not permitted researchers or members of 

the general public to listen to recordings they legally control outside 

the limited scope of research facilities maintained by research institutions. Secure streaming to distant locales for research purposes could 

offer a solution to these problems, but institutions rarely can provide 

this service because of the challenges of licensing audio for research 

purposes efficiently and economically. 

Investing government resources in the preservation of audio 

recordings is rarely perceived as being in the public interest when 

access to the preserved recordings is severely restricted. Broad access to historical recordings thus generates support for audio preservation. Such access can be achieved through developments along 

three avenues. First, the plan recommends improving the processes 

of discovery and cataloging through collaborative efforts to create a 

national discography and directory of recorded sound collections, 

and establishing best practices for audio cataloging. Second, copyright legislation reform should be enacted to apply federal copyright 

protection to sound recordings produced prior to February 15, 1972. 

This will create a legal framework for libraries and archives to copy 

and disseminate orphan works and for revising section 108 of the 

U.S. Copyright Act, which grants crucial exceptions to the exclusive 

rights of copyright owners and thus allows libraries and archives to 

reproduce materials for purposes of public access to further private 

study, scholarship, and research. Third, organizational initiatives 

should be undertaken to facilitate broadened legal public access to 

recorded sound collections. Such initiatives include license agreements for streaming; a shared digital preservation access network 

for sound recordings that offers a secure location for the storage 

of derivative files digitized by partner libraries and archives, and 

a managed licensing system for sharing of access copies; a labels 

ownership database to facilitate obtaining authorizations to stream 

recordings; broadened access to sound recordings that have been 

digitized by the Library of Congress; and codes of best practices to 

help clarify libraries’ and archives’ fair use rights to preserve and 

make sound recordings available to patrons.

Long-Term National Preservation and Access Strategies

To assist the Library of Congress in coordinating and implementing 

an effective long-term national preservation program and to raise 
4 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

public awareness about sound recordings and preservation, the Li-

brary of Congress National Recording Preservation Board must ex-

pand its activities and responsibilities. An advisory Executive Lead-

ership Committee on Recorded Sound Preservation, comprising top 

executives from recording companies and heads of sound recording 

archives, will ensure that a commitment to assist the Library of Con-

gress in implementing recommendations in this plan will continue 

throughout the years it will take to achieve the goals of the national 

sound recording preservation program. A coordinated national col-

lections policy will help ensure that a greater number of significant 

published recordings are acquired and preserved by the Library 

of Congress and partner institutions through the Copyright Office, 

including works published only in online versions. The collections 

policy will encourage statewide and regionally based programs to 

collect and preserve locally produced recorded sound, and will de-

velop strategies and tools to collect and preserve radio broadcasts. 

Licensing agreements for downloading recordings must be amended 

to allow for educational use. Fundraising initiatives must be devel-

oped, encouraged, and coordinated. Progress in achieving the na-

tional sound recording preservation program should be assessed on 

a regular basis. 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 5

1. Building the National Sound Recording Preservation Infrastructure

The State of Recorded Sound Preservation in the United States: A National 

Legacy at Risk in the Digital Age, a report commissioned by the National Recording Preservation Board of the Library of Congress and 

published in August 2010, presents a challenge to those responsible 

for the preservation of the nation’s sound recording heritage. In an 

age when digital technology has become “the format of choice to 

achieve the objectives of recorded sound preservation,” few of the 

public institutions, libraries, and archives currently in possession 

of the bulk of the nation’s recorded sound heritage—some 46 million recordings1

—“have the facilities, playback hardware, and staff 

resources to preserve recordings,” the report reveals. Most of these 

institutions do not have the capacity to build the information technology infrastructure necessary to produce digital files or to ensure 

the integrity of their digital preservation files over the long term 

(Council on Library and Information Resources [CLIR] and Library 

of Congress 2010, 69).

Funding for audio preservation, the report notes, is “decentralized and inadequate.” Although the creation of the Library of Congress Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation has furthered 

progress in the field, the study maintains that “[r]esources must be 

invested not only in rescuing specific collections but also in developing techniques and methodologies that will enable more institutions 

to afford to assume a share of the work” (CLIR and Library of Congress 2010, 4).

A nationally coordinated approach to problems of infrastructure building is the only feasible way to surmount the challenges 

involved in preserving our audio heritage, especially in an era of 

severe budgetary constraints. Sharing of facilities and knowledge; 

coordination of efforts to make the best use of limited resources; 

agreement on standards and best practices; and cooperation at the 

institutional, regional, national, and international levels, and between public and private entities—all will be necessary to achieve 

the national-level infrastructure for preservation envisioned in this 

National Recording Preservation Plan.

The new national preservation infrastructure should be developed in a coordinated manner with three principal goals: 

1. Expansion of the physical and digital infrastructure to properly 

store and preserve at-risk audio material

2. Development of educational initiatives, including degree programs to train specialists for positions integral to the digitization 

and preservation of recorded sound, along with the establishment 

of a centralized Audio Preservation Resource Directory website of 

professional knowledge to support the educational mission and 

keep professionals informed of latest developments 

3. Establishment of a coordinated national research agenda to support the development of new technologies to meet some of the 

most challenging problems in the field 

1 The figure of 46 million was derived in a survey prepared by Heritage Preservation, 

Inc. (2005, 40) in partnership with the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Services.
6 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

The three subsections that follow offer eight recommendations 

formulated to address these interwoven areas of development.

Physical and Digital Infrastructure

Audiovisual materials are the fastest growing segment of our na-

tion’s archives and special collections. Experts in the field rank the 

lack of appropriate archival storage and conservation facilities for 

these materials as their most challenging management issue, fol-

lowed closely by the need to digitize audiovisual media before phys-

ical deterioration and format obsolescence make digitization difficult 

and costly, if not impossible (Dooley and Luce 2010).

To extend the life span of physical carriers of recorded sound,

2

develop sufficient capacity for reformatting deteriorating media, and 

securely store digital files, several steps must be taken. 

Recommendation 1.1: 

Recorded Sound Media Storage Facilities

Construct environmentally controlled storage facilities that 

provide optimal conditions for the long-term preservation 

of recorded sound media.

Studies have shown that proper storage, including a controlled en-

vironment with low temperature and humidity levels, is the single 

most important factor in slowing the physical degradation of audio-

visual media. When stored at room temperatures, significant damage 

is likely; magnetic media formats, which are especially sensitive to 

fluctuations in temperature and humidity, are particularly vulner-

able. Despite this fact, most of the nation’s publicly and privately 

held audio collections currently are stored under less than archival 

conditions that contribute to their deterioration. 

Some commercial and public facilities, such as the Library of 

Congress Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation, have 

been designed to store recorded sound and moving image collec-

tions under optimal conditions. For most institutions responsible for 

audio collections, however, such facilities are too expensive to build, 

too remote to access, or too limited in capacity to meet the needs of 

all stakeholders nationwide. Although many institutions have built 

offsite environmentally controlled storage facilities for books and 

paper-based collections, few have allotted space to audio holdings, 

which are inherently less stable than paper media.

Given the large volume of endangered audio recordings that 

require preservation, it is essential that at-risk collections receive 2

 Audiovisual engineers use the term carrier to refer to the physical media on which 

sound has been recorded. Examples of analog carriers of recorded sound include wax 

cylinders; magnetized steel wire; flat discs with bases made of rubber, acetate, lacquer 

(at times with aluminum, glass, or cardboard backing), shellac, and vinyl, and metal 

parts in masters; and magnetic audio tape, with bases composed of paper, cellulose 

acetate, polyester, and polyvinyl. See Council on Library and Information Resources 

and Library of Congress 2006, 3–6.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 7

priority for storage under conditions that can maximize their life 

span and provide additional time for preservation reformatting. 

Library and archives professional associations should advocate on 

behalf of their members for increased public and private funding to 

construct new storage facilities or convert existing facilities so as to 

house audiovisual media under environmental conditions that will 

prolong their survival until they can be reformatted.

Regional or other collaborations between libraries and archives 

should be encouraged to create environmentally controlled storage 

facilities for audiovisual media that follow best practices. Facilities 

that serve multiple institutions within a geographic area, including 

smaller organizations, could enable cost efficiencies while providing 

improved storage conditions for audio and other media. Research 

libraries that have formed partnerships to coordinate digital and 

print storage strategies should consider developing collaborative 

facilities for the archival storage of audio and moving image works. 

Such facilities also might be combined with collaborative preservation reformatting centers.

Recommendation 1.2: 

Expansion of the National Capacity for Audio Preservation

Develop strategies to increase local, regional, and national 

resources for sound recording preservation reformatting to 

meet projected needs.

Expansion of the national capacity for audio preservation reformatting is critical. Studies have concluded that many analog audio 

recordings must be digitized within the next 15 to 20 years—before 

sound carrier degradation and the challenges of acquiring and maintaining playback equipment make the success of these efforts too 

expensive or unattainable. 

Libraries, archives, and cultural heritage organizations generally 

do not have the facilities, equipment, or expertise to reformat and 

preserve audio holdings. In fact, only a few institutions and commercial specialists outside of the Library of Congress Packard Campus are fully capable of performing analog-to-digital transfers of the 

many audio formats. 

The following steps are recommended to address the situation:

• Develop or expand in-house digitization and preservation facilities to include audio preservation reformatting capabilities, 

and staff these facilities with highly skilled audio preservation 

specialists.

Institutions with significant audio holdings should investigate 

the benefits, in terms of cost efficiencies and workflows, that can 

be realized by creating or expanding in-house facilities or by joining regional consortia. Initial efforts might be focused on particular formats, such as audiocassettes, that are held in abundance at 

the institution. 
8 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan • Develop collaborations for outsourcing preservation services.

Institutions that have significant audio collections but are un-

able to establish in-house audio preservation centers should de-

velop programs, individually or collaboratively, to contract with 

private companies that provide professional audio preservation 

reformatting services.

3

 Consortial approaches can enable a wide 

range of cultural heritage institutions to outsource preservation 

services, regardless of the size of the institution or the audio col-

lection. Many advantages may be realized by sharing expertise, 

planning, guidelines, and infrastructure, including metadata tem-

plates, workflows, and quality control procedures.

• Investigate the possibility of increasing the audio preservation 

capacity of the Library of Congress Packard Campus for Audio 

Visual Conservation so that other nonprofit institutions can make 

use of the Library’s facilities to preserve their audio collections.

Current Packard Campus preservation facilities could be ex-

panded and staffed by either Library or non-Library personnel 

subject to the Library’s oversight. Alternatively, outside funding 

could be used to establish a second shift at the Packard Campus 

to undertake preservation work for other institutions. These pres-

ervation programs could be established in collaboration with the 

National Recording Preservation Foundation (Recommendation 

4.5) to enable the outside institutions involved to receive contribu-

tions from the Foundation.

Recommendation 1.3: 

Digital Storage

Devise strategies to ensure that digital repositories are ac-

cessible to libraries and archives of all sizes for the longterm preservation of audio content.

The long-term preservation of and access to digital audio content 

relies upon the implementation of digital repository systems that 

typically provide data management services in addition to bit level 

storage.

4

 Archives that employ digital repository systems, as well as 

any system providers with whom they contract, must be financially 

stable and follow best practices in managing data over time. 

Libraries and archives responsible for preserving digital audio 

3

 Several successful programs can serve as models for establishing collaborative 

outsourced services for analog-to-digital conversion. See, for example, “Sound 

Model: Collaborative Infrastructure for Digital Audio,” which describes a project for 

digitizing materials from a consortia of cultural heritage institutions in the Western 

states (available at http://imlsdcc.grainger.illinois.edu/Collection.aspx?c=2662). 4

 The term repository is used to name both the organization (typically an archive) that 

takes responsibility for content and the information technology systems that support 

the preservation of content in digital form. A number of academic and governmental 

archival institutions are developing appropriate organizational practices and policies, 

and determining the best architectures for technical systems. Library and archival 

associations are supporting these efforts by describing repositories at a high level, 

defining preservation metadata, and outlining methods for auditing performance. 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 9

content would benefit from participating in national and international activities to develop policies, practices, and systems for the 

preservation of digital content. Broader digital data preservation 

initiatives likewise would benefit from associations with recorded 

sound archives and digital-audio specialists that contribute expertise 

to support the development of repository system tools to ingest and 

manage recorded sound content. The preservation of time-based 

media such as audio carries with it special requirements for formatting, playback, and management. The audio preservation community 

must encourage the development of practices and tools that specifically support the ingestion and management of digital audio content 

(see Recommendations 2.4 and 2.6). Also needed are models for service-level agreements between archives and third-party repository 

system providers, tailored to the particular requirements of digital 

audio collections.

The following steps are necessary to achieve these goals: 

• Develop strategies for the creation of local, regional, and national 

digital repository systems for the storage and long-term management of audio content, including an examination of audio-specific 

aspects of storage media selection and refreshment, digital format 

migration, and system emulation. 

Long-term preservation depends on the migration of content 

to new data storage media or formats as needed and, in some 

cases, on the emulation of obsolete playback systems. The tools, 

practices, and workflows for the ingestion of data representing 

audio content into a digital repository differ from those typically 

used for the ingestion of other types of data. Currently, many 

organizations ingest digital data from the reformatting of paper documents, still photographs and other pictorial items, and 

born-digital text, but few ingest audiovisual content into digital 

repositories.

• Establish consortial digital repositories and agreements between 

institutions, and develop models for new ventures to follow. 

Economies of scale can be obtained by collaborations that reduce start-up expenditures and long-term operating costs. Great 

societal value will be provided by repositories geared toward 

small and medium-sized archives and cultural heritage organizations that lack the infrastructure both to manage the preservation 

of digital audio files and to provide access. Consortial models 

developed for digital text and image repositories can provide 

guidelines for new ventures, especially with regard to auspices, 

governance, funding models, and other related matters.5

5

 See, for example, MetaArchive (http://www.metaarchive.org/). In addition, the 

Audiovisual Archive Network (http://www.archivenetwork.org/) is developing a pilot 

project for a scalable prototype library and digital repository service. The HathiTrust 

referred to its board of governors a proposal to broaden its mission statement from 

focusing exclusively on building a “digital archive of library materials converted from 

print” to include “broad-ranging intellectual assets (including, but not limited to audio 

and video files, art slides, research data, museum specimens, born digital files, etc.).” See 

http://www.hathitrust.org/constitutional_convention2011_ballot_proposals#proposal5.
10 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan • Develop methods, carry out tests, and publish recommendations 

for the interchange of digital audio content between repository 

organizations and systems.

Enabling interchanges entails a combination of digital content 

packaging, transfer protocols, and effective communication be-

tween sending and receiving organizations. Content interchange 

is important for two reasons: First, a given content item may not 

remain in the perpetual care of an institution; and second, provid-

ers of repository systems may not be in business forever. A pres-

ervation life cycle model must include the transfer of items from 

one archive or system provider to another and their subsequent 

management and access provision by a new repository.

Educational and Professional Training

Recorded sound collections and archives require personnel highly 

skilled in all facets of audio creation, management, and preservation. 

Audio-specific archival preservation practices do not receive suf-

ficient attention—if they receive any attention at all—in most library 

and information science degree programs. Professional training 

programs for audio engineers rarely touch on preservation transfer 

work, a subfield of audio engineering with its own distinct dis-

course, set of practices, and methods. Yet a solid grounding in audio 

preservation can be acquired only through a formal educational cur-

riculum with an emphasis on core knowledge and competencies that 

reflect the interdisciplinary nature of the field. Educational programs 

should include training in science, technology, engineering, and 

math, as well as critical listening content skills.

Practices for audio preservation and audio archive management 

have not been systematically documented, collated, and dissemi-

nated. Much of the theoretical and practical knowledge pertain-

ing to sound archives and audio preservation is held primarily by 

older engineers who have experience with historical audio formats 

and legacy playback equipment, and it is rapidly disappearing as 

they retire, leaving their positions to be filled by a new generation 

focused on the creation and distribution of digital media. Those in 

other disciplines in audio archiving, such as curatorship, archive 

management, and preservation practices, often transmit information 

through informal channels. Such documentation that does exist is 

not always widely available, and misinformation abounds. Further-

more, the transition to born-digital audio creates even more layers 

of complexity. The establishment of a collaborative Audio Preserva-

tion Resource Directory of professional knowledge not only would 

improve communications within the field, but also would provide 

professionals with reliable information about recorded sound preser-

vation practices.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 11

Recommendation 1.4: 

University Courses and Degree Programs

Establish university-based degree programs in audio archiving and preservation. 

Curricula and course materials designed to teach core knowledge 

and skills in audio archiving and preservation must be developed in 

three primary areas: 

1. Administration and management of archives and collections 

2. Physical conservation and reformatting of historical audio recording formats 

3. Management of digital audio assets and storage systems6

Curricula should be developed at both the undergraduate and 

graduate levels, with the understanding that while only a few institutions will offer specific degrees in the field, many institutions may 

offer applicable courses as part of related programs. 

Undergraduate courses and degree programs should focus on 

the technical aspects of reformatting historical audio collections, 

digital asset management, and skills related to information technology (IT), such as database development, server administration, and 

systems integration. Students also should become familiar with recorded sound history and should develop basic musical and critical 

listening skills. Graduate courses and degrees should be offered in 

archive administration and collection management, conservation, 

digital asset management, IT-related skills, advanced techniques for 

the reformatting of historical audio collections, materials science, and 

information retrieval technologies for audio content. Emerging cataloging and metadata standards and best practices specific to managing and providing access to sound recording collections should 

be included in the programs. To prepare archivists responsible for 

setting preservation priorities to take into account the cultural and 

historical significance of materials, students should become aware of 

ways that scholars from a variety of fields (e.g., history, music, media 

studies, cultural studies) use audiovisual materials. Periodic assessment surveys of jobs, recruitment patterns, and skill sets needed in 

the field of sound recording preservation should be conducted, and 

the curricula refined accordingly.

The Library of Congress and the National Recording Preservation Board can support these goals by collaborating with national 

and international institutions of higher education, as well as the education committees of the Audio Engineering Society (AES) and the 

Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSC), to establish and 

maintain channels for sharing expertise; identify gaps in curriculum 

materials and encourage development in needed areas; and maintain 

an up-to-date bibliography of literature and a current list of relevant educational programs and curriculum materials via the Audio 

6

 For a discussion of core knowledge and skills, see CLIR and Library of Congress 

2010, Appendix B. 
12 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

Preservation Resource Directory website (Recommendation 1.6).

To accomplish these goals, the following steps are 

recommended: • Identify institutions best equipped and willing to teach sound re

-

cording management, archiving, and preservation, and encourage 

them to develop programs. 

The National Recording Preservation Board should coordi-

nate an effort to identify institutions of higher learning that can 

best meet the objectives and requirements specified. Discussions 

should be initiated with appropriate university representatives 

to encourage a needs assessment and feasibility study. The Board 

should provide whatever support is possible and suitable, includ-

ing encouraging funding agencies to assist with program start-up 

costs. 

A laboratory-based curriculum is essential. These institutions 

must be equipped with appropriate studios and facilities to pre-

serve analog and digital recordings. A successful program would 

combine faculty with advanced degrees and instructors with 

professional experience. To provide practical hands-on experi-

ence, educational programs must develop collaborative relation-

ships with local, state, and national recorded sound libraries and 

archives to establish internships and facilitate exchanges of ideas 

relating to theory and practice. 

• Encourage funding and support of educational programs. 

Universities that undertake education and research in record-

ed sound must agree to provide funding themselves and to seek 

additional support from external sources. Without a firm commit-

ment of internal funding, academic institutions cannot fulfill their 

educational objectives and will not garner the support of public 

and private funding entities. 

Federal, state, and local grant-making organizations, along 

with foundations and private donors, should be encouraged to 

expand their mandates and support the educational and research 

needs of institutions in the field. The National Recording Preser-

vation Foundation (Recommendation 4.5) should publicize the 

preservation activities of educational institutions and attempt to 

match projects and initiatives with appropriate funding agencies. 

The Foundation also should make efforts to inform prospective 

funders of the importance of professional audio preservation 

training programs. 

• Encourage the creation of internships and fellowships in audio 

archiving and preservation. 

It is critical that students undertake medium- to long-term 

institutional internships either as part of their graduate education 

or as post-graduate experience. An internship is a longstanding 

integral component in all academic programs in North America 

designed to educate and train art, film, library, and archive con-

servators. Internships expose new professionals to a range of 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 13

hands-on opportunities for preserving and reformatting source 

originals under the supervision and mentoring of seasoned preservation professionals. In their future work, these students may be 

the only preservation professionals on staff, so they need intensive 

exposure to a wide range of recorded sound preservation issues, 

as well as opportunities to practice decision-making skills within 

the broader mission of a cultural institution.

The Library of Congress Packard Campus should expand its 

activities in providing internships and fellowships relating to the 

preservation and management of recorded sound collections. The 

National Recording Preservation Board should work with other 

organizations to identify additional recorded sound archives and 

studios that are actively involved in audio preservation or management and encourage them to offer internships. These internship and fellowship opportunities should be posted on the Audio 

Preservation Resource Directory website (Recommendation 1.6).

Recommendation 1.5: 

Continuing Education in Audio Preservation

Establish continuing education programs for practicing audio engineers, archivists, curators, and librarians.

Continuing education programs must be established to ensure that 

practicing audio engineers, archivists, curators, and librarians acquire new knowledge and skills in audio management, archiving, 

and preservation. To achieve the broadest possible outreach, these 

programs should take a variety of forms, including traveling and 

web-based workshops, university-based continuing education programs, and distance education offerings. Such nationally and internationally recognized leaders in the field as ARSC, AES, the Society 

of American Archivists (SAA), the American Library Association 

(ALA), and the Music Library Association (MLA) are encouraged to 

create a special emphasis on workshops in this area as part as their 

regional and national conferences. In addition, community college 

and technical training schools should offer workshops and courses 

to introduce audio preservation concepts to students preparing for 

technical careers.

The Library of Congress and the National Recording Preservation Board will contribute to continuing education endeavors by 

listing workshops and other training opportunities on the Audio 

Preservation Resource Directory website, assisting with the development of workshops, and identifying funding opportunities through 

the Board. Ideally, all workshops should be offered at the lowest possible cost to attract the largest possible audience.

Workshops should stress the importance of standards-based and 

best practice approaches to managing and reformatting analog and 

born-digital audio collections. They must offer theoretical and technical knowledge and training for engineers, archivists, and librarians 

on a range of related topics, such as audio collection management; 
14 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

policy and planning for audio archives; rights management; assess-

ment of collection preservation needs; format identification; recorded 

sound history; digital curation; cataloging and metadata standards 

and best practices; techniques for playback and transferring legacy 

formats; folk, popular, and classical music history; and the appli-

cation of musical training in cataloging and reformatting musical 

sound recordings. 

Recommendation 1.6: 

Audio Preservation Resource Directory 

Create a collaborative online resource to collect, vet, and 

disseminate knowledge and best practices in the field of re-

corded sound preservation. 

A comprehensive website should be established to collect, vet, and 

disseminate knowledge about recorded sound preservation. The 

website, or web portal, should be a central directory that includes re-

sources for decision makers and practitioners within the audio pres-

ervation and archiving community. Once established, the directory 

will serve the needs of educators, researchers, and students by pro-

viding a solid foundation for organized professional education and 

training, research, and practice. Not only will such a website serve 

as a critical educational resource for the public and for those institu-

tions and communities of practice that are underserved and are in 

need of up-to-date information, but also it will help raise awareness 

of the fragility of our national audio heritage.

The directory will facilitate open access to the collected knowl-

edge of the audio preservation field, serving the audio preservation 

community and the public in the following ways: • As a comprehensive resource for audio archive professionals, aca

-

demics, students, and the public

• As a resource for creating academic courses and degree programs, 

and for developing lesson plans at the K–12 level to educate 

young people in sound recording history, preservation, and access 

issues

• As a source of critical information for decision makers who need 

to learn about issues of audio management and preservation in 

order to make appropriate policy or funding choices 

• As a base from which to build and improve standards and best 

practices

• As a site for informational exchanges between local, national, and 

international archival and academic communities

• As a resource for providing information to the general public 

about the importance of preserving our recorded sound heritage 

• As a resource for providing students interested in pursuing ca-

reers in audio archiving and preservation with information about 

the field 

• As a resource for information about organized research centers, 

academic programs, hosted lectures, symposia, residencies, and 

“travel to collections” research grants 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 15

• As a resource that documents the histories of people, techniques, 

and institutions that have played important roles in the field of 

recorded sound

Although one person or organization cannot accomplish the 

central tasks of gathering, cataloging, and making accessible the collective knowledge of the field, there should be a central access portal 

for collecting and distributing the information. Effective management and long-term sustainability of such a comprehensive resource 

are much more likely if a single organization—ideally, a national 

flagship organization such as the Library of Congress Packard Campus and the National Recording Preservation Board—oversees its 

operations.

The Audio Preservation Resource Directory

The Audio Preservation Resource Directory website will function as an integral part of the national sound recording preservation program. The following components are described more 

fully in other sections of this plan:

• An education page (Recommendations 1.4 and 1.5)

• A recording history page (Recommendation 1.8)

• A collections management page (Recommendations 2.1, 2.2, 

2.3, 3.1, 3.2, and 4.3) 

• A public access page (Recommendation 3.9 and 3.11) 

• A fundraising page (Recommendation 4.5)

A National Technology Research Agenda

A national research agenda for audio preservation should focus on 

developing, testing, and enhancing science-based approaches to all 

areas that affect audio preservation.7

 These areas include materials 

science and media characteristics, optimum signal extraction practices, and automated and multistreamed approaches to the preservation of recorded sound media. In addition, information on legacy 

recording equipment and practices should be compiled, preserved, 

and disseminated. Government, industry, and academia must collaborate at the national and international levels to address research 

concerns and develop effective solutions.

7

 The National Recording Preservation Act of 2000 specifies that in order to implement 

a “comprehensive national sound recording preservation program,” the Librarian of 

Congress shall “undertake studies and investigations of sound recording preservation 

activities as needed, including the efficacy of new technologies, and recommend 

solutions to improve these practices.” See 2 USC § 1711(a) and (b)(4).
16 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

Recommendation 1.7: 

New Technologies for Audio Preservation

Encourage scientific and technical research leading to the 

development of new technologies to recover, reformat, and 

preserve audio recording media. 

Some problems presented by the large amount and fragile condition 

of audio media requiring preservation can be resolved only through 

research initiatives that lead to new technologies. It is essential to 

develop technologies that can be used to efficiently reformat the vast 

quantities of recorded sound residing in major archival collections 

before their carriers degrade. Scientific research must be encouraged 

to determine the life expectancy of all formats as well as to find effec-

tive ways to slow down the deterioration process and recover sound 

from already degraded audio carriers. Solutions that are indepen-

dent of the original recording practices, media, or equipment (e.g., 

non-contact playback) can mitigate impediments to preservation re-

sulting from media deterioration and equipment obsolescence.

Priorities include the following: 

• Research to quantify the life expectancy of all analog formats, 

resulting in the development of diagnostic tools for identifying 

endangered media and integration of those tools into workflows.

The Library of Congress Preservation Research and Testing 

Division (PRTD) already has initiated research to collect scientific 

data on the physical characteristics of modern media, including 

physical and chemical ageing characterization and assessment of 

deterioration and degradation components, with the aim to de-

velop diagnostic tools to predict media deterioration. The Library 

of Congress will continue to lead these efforts and will seek to 

collaborate with other institutions to achieve these research goals. 

The focus of PRTD research into non-invasive technologies to 

identify and characterize media is part of this initiative.

• Research, including chemical and physical analyses on deteriorat-

ing media carriers, that leads to improvements in care and han-

dling, as well as ways to slow degradation and recover content. 

Because numerous legacy formats are near the end of their life 

expectancies, research and development must be made a prior-

ity. The National Recording Preservation Board’s recorded sound 

preservation study noted that many archivists and engineers have 

made the study of magnetic tape properties a priority (CLIR and 

Library of Congress 2010, 96). Quantification of chemical and 

physical properties should be expanded to embrace all media 

carriers. 

Scientifically researched and developed methods to solve 

the problems encountered with deteriorating media carriers 

are urgently needed. For example, scientifically developed and 

well-documented methods are necessary to recover audio from 

tapes with “sticky shed syndrome” (binder hydrolysis) and 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 17

delaminating lacquer discs. After completing studies on this issue, PRTD has concluded that reformatting should be given high 

priority, and is working with industry partners to understand the 

underlying degradation phenomena to potentially retard further 

development of this deterioration. 

Provided funding is available, PRTD will work to develop 

a workshop that includes academic, industrial, and government 

partners who have an interest in establishing testing criteria to 

ensure the quality and stability of the media on which their data 

are held. In addition, PRTD has undertaken the organization of 

a collaborative network of partners and researchers in academia, 

cultural heritage, and industry for assessment of current research, 

areas requiring further research, and the best use of current resources to coordinate research studies. Development of standardized testing procedures will allow comparison of risk for a wide 

range of existing media formats. Future testing of new and existing storage materials will inform migration requirements and assist associated workflows required to preserve at-risk materials.

• Research and development of new technologies for recovering 

sound from fragile media, including non-contact playback systems, and improving efficiencies in audio preservation. 

Further research should be undertaken to develop efficiencies 

in the areas of audio element preparation, transfer methods, and 

solutions for digital audio migration or emulation. Studies should 

be encouraged to determine effective ways to increase the level of 

automation used in quality review and assurance. An effort must 

be made to develop cost-effective, rapid, and, where beneficial, 

non-contact methods for reformatting.

The Library of Congress, for example, has been collaborating 

with physicists at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory to develop imaging technology for non-contact reformatting of audio 

material recorded on discs and cylinders. Since the imaging systems do not physically touch the playback surface, sound that had 

previously been considered irretrievable can be recovered from 

fragile and broken media. 

• Collaboration with AES to develop improved tools and metrics 

to permit the evaluation of the performance of digitizing systems 

(e.g., easy-to-use tone or signal generators, and software applications that permit lay people to administer pass/fail tests on 

equipment).

• Initiation of collaborative research at the national and international levels. 

There must be a free flow of information to expedite solutions 

and avoid overlapping of efforts. To this end, steps must be taken 

to reach out to national and international recorded sound communities and identify opportunities for collaborations on similar projects. Such partnerships may lead to a consensus on methodologies 
18 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

and best practices, further enhancing the efficiencies needed to 

execute a preservation agenda of this scope. Groups such as the 

International Association of Sound and Audiovisual Archives 

(IASA), the Association of Moving Image Archivists (AMIA), 

ARSC, and AES can help facilitate collaborations, publicize find-

ings, and articulate research needs to the scientific community.

Recommendation 1.8: 

Documentation of Legacy Technologies

Research, collect, document, and preserve information on 

legacy recording practices and technologies. 

There must be a systematic and sustained effort to compile and col-

lect information related to legacy recording technology and prac-

tices: where it is, how it works, and the characteristics, or “audio 

signatures,” of the recordings themselves. Additional efforts should 

be made to thoroughly document the expertise of legacy recording 

practitioners. This work can serve as the cornerstone for the develop-

ment of standardized methods and best practices for audio preserva-

tion reformatting, and will be shared through the Audio Preservation 

Resource Directory (Recommendation 1.6) to serve the needs of 

training and education. 

This process includes the following steps:

• Create a national directory of available obsolete equipment as a 

resource for audio preservation and restoration engineers that will 

indicate the location of hardware required for the playback and 

transfer of legacy recording formats.

The directory should inventory obsolete or difficult-to-locate 

equipment in the offices or studios of various record companies, 

independent studios, and independent producers. It should list 

tape machines, recording consoles, and outboard gear (e.g., equal-

izers, reverb units), among others, because such elements may be 

sought by those attempting to restore or reissue historical record-

ings. For each audio facility, the directory should list contact in-

formation and the financial and logistical terms on which access to 

the gear can be obtained.

Compilation could be a joint project of the applicable com-

mittees of ARSC, AMIA, the National Academy of Recording 

Arts and Sciences (NARAS), and AES. The directory should be 

made available online as part of the Audio Preservation Resource 

Directory and updated regularly. The directory could be ex-

panded in the future to include an appendix with a year-by-year 

or decade-by-decade list of major formats used at different stages 

of the recording process, including recording, mixing, and mas-

tering. Information for the appendix might be gathered through 

partnerships with universities that offer advanced degrees in 

audio engineering, as well as through the Producers & Engineers 

Wing of NARAS and AES.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 19

• Initiate a program to videotape interviews and demonstrations by 

senior audio engineers.

To document recording practices used to capture sound from 

legacy media, lecture demonstrations by expert practitioners 

should be videotaped. They should cover older formats, playback 

techniques, and playback systems. The videos should be developed under the auspices of the Board and made available on the 

Audio Preservation Resource Directory as free podcasts or webcasts. Possible partners with the Board include ARSC and AES, as 

these organizations already have taken preliminary steps to address this issue by identifying and interviewing experts.

• Create a digital repository of manuals and schematics for legacy 

equipment. 

A coordinated effort is needed to systematically acquire service manuals and schematics for all legacy playback equipment. It 

is necessary to identify gaps in the collection, solicit donations of 

manuals, and request the support of manufacturers and interested 

archives and libraries. The Packard Campus already has begun 

this process and should make information about this collection 

digitally available via the Audio Preservation Resource Directory 

website.

2. Blueprint for Implementing Preservation Strategies

The preservation community should adopt management strategies 

and practical operational procedures that facilitate the activities of 

recorded sound collection managers and technicians in meeting the 

challenges of digital preservation. Many of the needs can be met 

through the Audio Preservation Resource Directory website (Recommendation 1.6) and through efforts led by organizations such as 

AES and ARSC. Without timely actions, archives will be unable to 

preserve and make accessible analog and born-digital audio content 

for current and future generations. Failure to meet this challenge will 

place our nation’s audio cultural heritage at further risk.

Born-digital audio is increasingly woven into the fabric of dayto-day information creation and exchange. Studio-recorded music, 

radio broadcasts, sound for film and video, field recordings, personal 

recordings, podcasts, interviews, recorded meetings and conference 

proceedings, as well as audio blogs and audio tweets, are created en 

masse today in born-digital formats. 

Concurrent with changes in the mode of audio production, digital audio files have become the accepted preservation format for legacy analog recordings. The State of Recorded Sound Preservation in the 

United States notes the “opportunities and promises” of digital media 

for preservationists. For example, “generation loss” (i.e., the loss of 

quality inherent in copying material from one audiotape to another 

as old tapes deteriorate) is nonexistent in digital transfers. The report 

emphasizes, however, the significant technical, organizational, and 
20 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

funding challenges that institutions will confront as they make the 

transition to digital file preservation approaches: “new procedures 

and tools, a new and complicated lexicon, formidable and timeconsuming documentation requirements, daunting storage and IT 

responsibilities, and an incomplete set of standards and best prac-

tices—and all of this only after significant up-front investment of 

money to create technical infrastructures necessary for digital preser-

vation” (CLIR and Library of Congress 2010, 66).

The nature of digital files and digital file storage necessitates on-

going, active management at a number of levels. Software and hard-

ware are constantly evolving, hastening the obsolescence of digital 

media, software, and file formats. Any misstep in the creation and 

management of audio files presents risks to their long-term sustain-

ability equal to the risks of environmental or physical degradation 

for physical media. Files that are described and arranged poorly can 

become impossible to retrieve. The application of methodologies 

appropriate to born-digital recording requires significant shifts in 

practice by content creators and producers as well as archivists, who 

must adopt practices that support digital preservation as an active, 

managed process throughout the life cycle of the audio file. 

Audio Preservation Management

To ensure that recorded sound materials are successfully preserved 

in the digital age, collection managers must be equipped with strate-

gies, models, and guidelines to aid them in making informed policy 

decisions. They must have tools to help them adhere to best practices 

in managing their collections; survey and appraise their collections 

to prioritize for digitization their most significant and endangered 

recordings; and form mutually beneficial public-private partnerships 

to engage in costly digital preservation reformatting and access proj-

ects. Using the Audio Preservation Resource Directory website, as 

suggested in the following three recommendations, can facilitate the 

achievement of these goals.

Recommendation 2.1: 

Guide to Audio Preservation

Compile a basic audio preservation handbook to guide non-

specialists in the management of audio collections.

If collection managers are to make strategic decisions and implement 

effective preservation strategies, they must have a set of core stan-

dards and best practices to guide them. Although organizations such 

as IASA have developed highly technical sets of guidelines in spe-

cific areas,

8 The State of Recorded Sound Preservation in the United States

concluded that “[t]he capacity to adhere to current best practices for 

audio preservation is beyond the reach of most institutions” (CLIR 

and Library of Congress 2010, 5). There is a significant need for a 8

 See, for example, IASA 2005 and IASA 2009.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 21

basic conservation handbook targeted primarily to smaller organizations and individuals who lack expertise specific to audio conservation and preservation. 

The handbook will be a component of the Audio Preservation 

Resource Directory website and will address the following topics: 

• Facilities: specifications for climate (appropriate temperature and 

relative humidity range for each format), construction materials, 

lighting, ventilation, fire suppression systems, and security

• Media: overview of formats, including composition and types of 

degradation common to sound carriers

• Housing and storage: appropriate shelving, containers, and other 

enclosures as recommended for each media format

• Handling: guidelines for cleaning, repair, and playback

• Digital storage: overview of digital file formats and best practices 

for storing digital files

• Cataloging: overview of arrangement, description, and metadata 

conventions

• Reformatting: guidelines for planning a preservation project, including how to outsource reformatting

• Rights management: guidelines and model agreements (covering 

archival deposits, interviews, oral history licensing, etc.), with an 

emphasis on intellectual property rights, and ethical and legal issues regarding use and access 

• Appraisals: general guidelines for surveying and assessing the 

physical condition of audio holdings and establishing priorities 

for preservation

Recommendation 2.2: 

Appraisal of Audio Collections for Preservation

Devise means to assist collection managers in conducting 

comprehensive appraisals of audio holdings with the goal 

of establishing priorities for preservation.

Institutions must conduct comprehensive item-level appraisals of 

their audio holdings to make strategic and timely preservation reformatting decisions.9

 By identifying recordings that are at greatest 

risk because of format obsolescence and physical condition, in addition to those that have the most historical importance for their users, 

institutions can make informed policy decisions and determine priorities for preservation. Data from appraisals can be used to justify 

preservation projects and support requests for funding. 

Surveys and appraisals should be structured to accomplish five 

primary goals: 

9

 The term appraisal in an archival context applies to the life cycle of audio recordings. 

Appraisals are undertaken to aid in the following areas: selecting items for acquisition 

and retention; establishing preservation priorities; determining the intellectual 

control of materials by gathering information on the physical description, content, 

provenance, etc.; providing access to users that complies with privacy rights, 

intellectual property rights, and other considerations; and protecting the collection by 

minimizing physical damage to the original materials. 
22 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

1. Quantify in specific detail types of audio carrier formats and the 

estimated number of hours of recorded content in collections. 

2. Provide an in-depth analysis of the physical condition of each 

item. 

3. Provide an assessment of the historical and research value of the 

content, including uniqueness, that takes into account intellectual 

property rights and other issues that may limit access. 

4. Rank collections from low to high priority for preservation.

5. Guide the allocation of resources toward reformatting the most 

significant and imperiled recordings. 

Few audio collections have been surveyed, analyzed, and ap-

praised in a manner that yields both qualitative and quantitative 

data. Such a project presents many challenges. Audio collections 

typically include a wide variety of materials, ranging from commer-

cially released recordings on relatively stable formats (e.g., massproduced discs) to unpublished instantaneous recordings on fragile 

or obsolete formats and born-digital files that are likely to have 

unique content. Addressing preservation and appraisal issues across 

this broad spectrum requires technical expertise, including knowl-

edge of specific formats and their physical or digital attributes, and 

the ability to assess the intellectual and historical value of content. In 

many institutions, significant collections are located outside libraries 

and archives, which means that they must be surveyed in offices, re-

search centers, museums, academic departments, broadcast facilities, 

and other units.10 For large or dispersed collections, a comprehensive 

survey and appraisal requires considerable commitments of time 

and funds. 

To assist managers in conducting audio collection surveys, the 

following steps are recommended: • Coordinate a collaborative nationwide effort to make available on

-

line (via the Audio Preservation Resource Directory) assessments 

of a range of audio collection appraisal tools that research institu-

tions have developed, many of which are freely available online.11

Each of the presently available tools has distinct attributes, 

which should be described, and the suitability of each tool for 

use with specific types of collections should be analyzed. Using 

10 Indiana University recently completed the first university-wide media preservation 

survey, which identified 560,000 audio, video, and film objects on the Bloomington 

campus alone. As part of the survey, Indiana University queried other Big Ten 

universities about media holdings and was able to obtain an estimate of 1.5 million 

audio objects across all 11 universities. At present, only one of these universities is 

conducting a similar campus-wide survey. See http://www.indiana.edu/~medpres/

documents/iub_media_preservation_survey_FINALwww.pdf.

11 See, for example: Indiana University and Harvard University’s Field Audio 

Collection Evaluation Tool (FACET) at http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/projects/

sounddirections/facet/index.shtml; Columbia University’s Audio Video Database 

(AVDb) at http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/services/preservation/audiosurvey.html; 

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Audio-Visual Self-Assessment Program 

(AVSAP) at http://www.library.illinois.edu/avsap/; and New York University’s Visual 

& Playback Inspection Ratings System (ViPIRS) at http://library.nyu.edu/preservation/

movingimage/vipirshome.html.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 23

or modifying existing tools will result in considerable savings for 

collection managers. ARSC, whose members developed several of 

these tools independently of one another, might be the most appropriate organization to coordinate this work.

• Encourage institutions that have completed media preservation 

surveys to share their results via the Audio Preservation Resource 

Directory website. 

Completed reports can assist other institutions in developing 

models to assess their collections and producing preliminary forecasts of the amount of at-risk media likely to require preservation 

and the requisite staffing, funding, and infrastructure that will 

be needed. The reports will also benefit vendors and suppliers 

integral to the preservation community by making it possible to 

quantify the scope of preservation issues and the needs for conservation and preservation tools and supplies. 

• Develop and maintain a list of experts who can assist collection 

managers with collection evaluation and appraisal surveys. 

The list, to be made available on the Audio Preservation Resource Directory website, should include experts from both the 

public and the private sector, and it should be updated annually. 

Qualifications and applicable experience should be indicated, 

including experience using one or more of the available appraisal 

tools.

• Encourage funding agencies to increase support for comprehensive surveys. 

Presently, two federal agencies provide funding for condition 

surveys of audio media, but not at levels sufficient for the type of 

comprehensive, institution-wide surveys and appraisals required 

to set priorities for audio preservation reformatting.12

Recommendation 2.3: 

Public-Private Partnerships 

Disseminate guidelines—via the Audio Preservation 

Resource Directory website—for establishing collaborative 

preservation partnerships between public institutions, private companies, private collectors, and other stakeholders 

to preserve endangered recordings.

Private collectors and a variety of other stakeholders, including artists, producers, sponsors, and arts organizations, hold a significant 

portion of the nation’s recorded sound heritage, encompassing commercial recordings of small and regional companies; recordings of 

genres of limited general appeal, such as those produced within and 

12 See Institute of Museum and Library Services (http://www.imls.gov/) and the 

National Endowment for the Humanities America’s Historical and Cultural 

Organizations grants programs (http://www.neh.gov/grants/guidelines/AHCO_

ImplementationGuidelines.html).
24 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

for ethnic communities; recordings of live performances that have 

not been released commercially; radio broadcasts; and privately pro-

duced recordings of historical or cultural significance, such as inter-

views and field recordings. Many of these recordings are likely to be 

unique or exist only in small quantities, making them a high priority 

for preservation. 

The holders of private recorded sound collections rarely are 

equipped to engage in preservation reformatting and access proj-

ects for material that is not commercially viable. Few grant agencies 

will consider funding the preservation of material in private hands. 

Partnerships between private individuals or groups and public or 

nonprofit institutions that have the resources and mission to provide 

these services, therefore, can be mutually beneficial.

Because record companies are vulnerable to changing markets 

and corporate resources, they also may find it difficult to manage 

and preserve valuable historical assets that are no longer commer-

cially viable. In such cases, collaborative efforts with public or non-

profit institutions to preserve the contents of record company vaults, 

including master recordings and associated documents, likewise can 

be beneficial. 

To encourage such collaborations, a component of the Audio 

Preservation Resource Directory website (Recommendation 1.6) 

should be devoted to publicizing public-private preservation part-

nerships. This resource will benefit public institutions and private 

collectors by providing examples of successful partnerships, as well 

as models for successful outcomes.13 The “partnerships” page should 

include the following elements: • Profiles of model projects. 

Selected projects should be publicized, with the goals, objec-

tives, and outcomes of each project outlined, along with contact 

information for the participants. Links should be provided to 

websites of funding agencies where cooperative audio preserva-

tion projects are listed or profiled.14

• Sample partnership agreements representing a range of possible 

relationships. 

Two of the most common types of partnerships fall under the 

parameters outlined in the following scenarios. In each, the right 

of the receiving institution to digitize, retain digitized copies, and 

provide public access to digitized copies within the limits of the 

law would be permanent and irrevocable.

1. The donor gives a collection to a public or nonprofit institu-

tion with an agreement that allows the receiving institution to 

digitize the collection for both preservation and public access 

purposes. Donors retain any intellectual property rights that 

13 The Recorded Sound Preservation Access Network (described in Recommendation 

3.8) exemplifies a plan for a public-private partnership that would reduce redundancy 

and release funds for the preservation of materials not held at multiple archives.

14 For an example of a model project, see National Jukebox: Historical Recordings from 

the Library of Congress at http://www.loc.gov/jukebox/.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 25

they may own and the right to commercially exploit the collection; however, they allow the receiving institution—the archival partner—to provide public access to the collection in any 

manner that the law allows. Donors have permanent access to 

digital copies in the archive and the right to commission digitization of additional recordings in the collection at agreed upon 

costs.

2. The donor and the archival partner agree to the donation of 

digital surrogates of the physical collection, which the donor 

continues to own. In this case, the donor agrees that the receiving institution can retain digital copies permanently for the 

purposes of preservation and public access, and the archive 

agrees to provide the donor with copies of the digital files upon 

request. 

• Profiles of model joint agreements for related preservation and 

conservation concerns.

Participants in hearings conducted by the National Recording 

Preservation Board suggested that archives might jointly purchase 

supplies (e.g., record sleeves, boxes, tape reels) in bulk quantities to lower unit costs (CLIR and Library of Congress 2010, 88). 

Certain types of supplies, such as tape reels, may no longer be 

commercially available in the near future. Collaborative efforts 

may become essential if collection managers are to acquire molds 

and manufacturing components for soon-to-be obsolete supplies 

and equipment. Organizations such as ARSC and MLA should 

facilitate the creation of such agreements for individual and institutional members. 

New Tools and Guidelines for Preserving 

Digital Audio Files

Many different types of organizations and individuals produce digital audio, including those who are involved in preservation work 

and those who create born-digital content. These stakeholders represent a wide range of organizational capacities and staffing, and they 

employ various production methodologies. Managing these diverse 

collections requires expertise in analog playback, digitization, collection of metadata, and administration of the IT infrastructure necessary to create, manage, and preserve digital files. Although standards 

and best practices already are in place to guide much of the work 

involved in audio preservation, collection managers may not have 

the expertise and resources to develop workflows appropriate to 

their operations. In addition, the arrival of new types of digital audio 

files and the fast pace of IT development have introduced complexities into the preservation effort that will require special attention to 

ensure effective long-term management. The four recommendations 

that follow suggest tools, models, and guidelines that should be developed to assist technicians and managers in meeting a variety of 

challenges associated with digital preservation.
26 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

Recommendation 2.4: 

Preservation Workflows for Audio Materials

Develop tools, practical implementation models, best prac-

tices, and high-efficiency workflows for digitizing analog 

recordings.

No single implementation plan can meet the needs of all organiza-

tions responsible for preserving audio materials. Essential core prin-

ciples of preservation nevertheless should be codified into a set of 

best practices, accompanied by a variety of models and workflows 

that can inform and guide a wide range of digital audio creators and 

groups committed to preservation. 

Research and development vetted by organizations such as 

ARSC, AES, and the Library of Congress is particularly needed in the 

following areas: • Implementation models that organizations can use to meet audio 

preservation standards and best practices for creating preserva-

tion-quality digital files.

A variety of workflows and implementation models must be 

created to serve the needs of different kinds of organizations and 

individuals that collect sound recordings. Workflows, in particular, 

are highly individual and variable—specific to the holdings, experi-

ence, technical knowledge, and the resources of an organization. 

Rather than a rigid set of guidelines, a set of core standards and 

best practices should be developed, along with a number of models 

for implementing them. These models can serve as the basis for 

organization-specific implementations that take a systems view 

of audio preservation operations. That is, they must address each 

component and function of the system, which may include selec-

tion for preservation, analog playback, analog-to-digital conversion, 

creation of preservation-quality digital files, collection of metadata, 

verification of data integrity, and administration of IT systems.

• Best practices for high-efficiency parallel transfer workflows for 

the simultaneous reformatting of multiple recordings in various 

formats.

Parallel transfer workflows are desirable because of the over-

whelming number of audio recordings in need of preservation, 

the ongoing degradation of many audio recordings, and the evergrowing obsolescence of all analog and physical digital audio formats. Although parallel transfer workflows are widely used, best 

practices in this area have not yet been defined. Further research 

is necessary to determine, for example, which recordings are most 

appropriate for this procedure, and how the inherent risks can be 

reduced. This work will inform the development of implemen-

tation models that guide safe, high-quality work. The develop-

ment and adoption of best practices also will assist organizations 

seeking funding for preservation projects that employ parallel 

transfers and other high-efficiency workflows by assuring funding 

agencies that the methodology is sound. 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 27

• Improved tools and metrics for system performance testing.

The systems used in the reformatting of content from legacy 

audio media to file-based formats must be subjected to tests that 

measure performance and adherence to standards and recommended practices.15 These systems include the analog-to-digital 

(A/D) converters, the signal path from the converter to the digital 

audio workstation (DAW), and the file-making and file-storage elements within the workstation. To serve workers in archives large 

and small (few of whom are engineers), affordable, user-friendly 

tools are urgently needed to measure the various aspects of performance within these systems and workflows. Examples include 

tools for measuring the performance of the audio-to-digital converter and tools for monitoring digital data management and filewriting integrity.16

The best tools for the conversion of analog sound recording 

to digital include A/D converters and DAWs (with supporting 

software), virtually all of which come from the commercial marketplace. In addition, many archives turn to specialist vendors to 

reformat their historical materials, and they will require reassurance that the vendor adheres to mutually agreed-upon guidelines 

and standards, as well as best practices. In both scenarios, archives 

need to know that the systems in use are capable of meeting standards and recommended guidelines, and that their performance 

is consistent over time. This means that there is a need for a list of 

performance elements, the determination of pass/fail points for 

each element, a method to measure against the pass/fail requirement, and easy-to-use tools to do the measuring. Performance 

metrics also should include methods of monitoring, testing, and 

verifying a vendor’s services.17

Recommendation 2.5: 

Metadata Standards for Digital Audio Files

Develop recommendations for metadata guidelines and best 

practices related to digital audio files that incorporate established standards and maximize interoperability.

Metadata, or data that describe data, is “a necessity in any digital 

storage and preservation environment,” according to IASA’s authoritative Guidelines on the Production and Preservation of Digital Audio 

Objects.

18 Data about digital files are needed to efficiently document, 

15 See International Association of Sound and Audiovisual Archives 2009 (IASA-TC 04) 

and Audio Engineering Society 2009 (AES17-1998 [r2009]).

16 See Federal Agencies Audio Visual Digitization Working Group 2011. 

17 Analog-to-digital performance guidelines are specified in Federal Agencies 

Digitization Guidelines Initiative (FADGI) 2012a and 2012b.

18 See International Association of Sound and Audiovisual Archives 2009 (IASA-TC 

04), chapter 3. IASA’s definition of metadata is as follows: “Metadata is structured 

data that provides intelligence in support of more efficient operations on resources, 

such as preservation, reformatting, analysis, discovery and use. It operates at its 

best in a networked environment, but is still a necessity in any digital storage and 

preservation environment. Metadata instructs end-users (people and computerised 

programmes) about how the data are to be interpreted.”
28 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

locate, access, and manage files. The record that indicates where a 

file resides, what it contains, who created it, how to play it back, 

and much more may be contained in metadata related to a digital 

audio file. Metadata can be used to search files, sort them, select files 

for preservation, guide their transfer and distribution, keep track of 

ownership and rights, document different versions or components 

of an audio recording, and assist in the reconstruction of multitrack 

recordings when the software used to create them is not available.19

The preservation of digital audio content depends on the meta-

data that an organization maintains in a database and the metadata 

that is embedded in individual files and/or digital packages (groups 

of related files). Without appropriate descriptive, administrative, and 

technical metadata, files and packages are not interpretable, manage-

able, or accessible. Technical metadata that allows a file’s provenance 

to be tracked must be added throughout the production process as 

audio content is created, and is required when recordings are digi-

tally reformatted. There also is a need for a best practice for the man-

agement of multitrack recordings in a digital file environment.

Currently there are no standards, guidelines, or models that ef-

fectively meet the needs of the wide range of stakeholders that strive 

to produce preservation-quality digital audio files. No single set of 

metadata guidelines can apply to all organizations because of dif-

ferences in data types, workflows, staffing, and capacities, as well as 

different end product needs of key communities.20

The following steps are recommended to improve the collection 

and management of metadata: • Develop metadata guidelines to meet the needs of the various 

communities engaged in the creation and preservation of digital 

audio.

Sustainable metadata guidelines and effective workflows 

must be developed to support standardization and digital file 

preservation for all classes of stakeholders: archives and librar-

ies, whose mission is to collect and preserve content; large-scale 

creators of content, such as broadcasters and major record com-

panies; and small-scale creators of content, such as podcasters, 

independent artists, oral historians, linguists, and journalists/

interviewers. A collaborative approach (perhaps involving work 

groups formed by AES, NARAS, IASA, and ARSC) will be re-

quired to assess the specific needs of these various constituencies. 

In the interest of widespread adoption, types of guidelines should 

19 Contemporary multitrack recordings often rely on the software used in their 

creation for their assembly into a larger multitrack work. Metadata, such as embedded 

file names and time stamps, can be used in the reconstruction of a multitrack 

recording without the original creation software.

20 The Federal Agencies Digitization Guidelines Initiative (FADGI), convened by the 

Library of Congress National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation 

Program, has established an Audio Visual Working Group. The stated goal of the 

group is “to identify, establish, and disseminate information about standards and 

practices for the digital reformatting of historical and cultural audio-visual materials 

by federal agencies.” The group has commissioned a number of studies and created 

guidelines for embedding metadata in Broadcast WAVE files. The initiative may 

be a model for future collaborations. Benefits from work that the initiative has 

already accomplished need not be restricted to federal programs. See http://www.

digitizationguidelines.gov/audio-visual/.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 29

be distinguished as (1) basic “core” metadata for all stakeholders, (2) additional recommended metadata for specific sets of 

stakeholders, and (3) optional metadata specific to individual 

organizations.

• Standardize metadata elements to maximize interoperability and 

efficiency. 

Metadata needs vary. Even so, significant differences in metadata elements inhibit interoperability and the transfer or sharing of digital objects. High degrees of variability can prevent the 

development of economies of scale in storage and data management. Guidelines should minimize variation in order to maximize 

interoperability and overall cost-efficiency. Whenever possible, 

guidelines should incorporate one or more of the established 

metadata standards, which could be refined as needed to increase 

their level of adoption.21

• Advocate for the implementation of standardized metadata schemas in commercially available and open source software.

Most digital audio workstations offer some ability to create, 

read, and edit metadata; however, cross-system compatibility is 

weak, and subsets of metadata vary depending on the platform. 

Standards have been proposed, but few software developers and 

systems manufacturers have adopted them. As a result, many 

archivists have developed their own proprietary approach to storing metadata for their audio collections. Interested organizations, 

such as AES, ARSC, and NARAS, should identify advocates (e.g., 

trade groups) capable of encouraging hardware and software 

developers to adopt standard metadata schemas that are crossplatform compatible and enduring. Tools that adhere to standards 

and best practices will better enable content creators to take on 

the implicit responsibility and role of curator of their born-digital 

audio content.

Recommendation 2.6: 

Tools to Support Preservation throughout the 

Content Life Cycle

Encourage the development of tools that support adherence 

to standards and best practices in the creation of sound recordings and in the management of their preservation.

In the digital realm, audio preservation activities depend on numerous software applications. Some of these come into play early in the 

21 A number of standards have already been established and, in some cases, 

implemented. Three examples from the European Broadcast Union add “chunks” that 

may be embedded in files in the WAVE format: the bext (Broadcast Extension) chunk, 

the aXML chunk, and the iXML chunk. Other standardized metadata formats specific 

to sound recordings include emerging AES specifications X098B for audio objects 

and X098C for process (“how produced”) metadata. Other generic digital content 

specifications are also relevant: METS, MODS, XMP, etc. 
30 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

content life cycle, when sound recordings are originally produced 

or when they are reformatted or transcoded in an archive to create 

the master files intended for long-term management. Others are em-

ployed later in the life cycle when integrated repository systems car-

ry out that long-term management. Throughout the life cycle, there 

are central or core software packages. At the early, creation phase, 

these software packages include the audio workstation’s operating 

system and the digital audio application where files are produced. 

Later in the life cycle, there is a core repository application with 

web-based services and application programming interfaces (APIs), 

where long-term data management takes place. There is an advan-

tage—and cost saving to archives, both commercial and noncommer-

cial—if the initial creation of a work is “born-archival”; that is, if it is 

in a format (including metadata) that can be ingested and managed 

“as is.” (See Recommendation 2.7.) 

Beyond these core systems, workflows throughout the content life 

cycle will benefit from an array of supporting services and applica-

tions. For example, when audio files are created, preservation success 

will be ensured by the use of tools to validate that a given file meets 

appropriate standards and specifications, to enhance the metadata em-

bedded in or associated with the file, and to establish an initial check-

sum (hash value) for the file, which then can be used to verify the file’s 

integrity throughout its life. In the data management segment of the 

life cycle, adjunct software tools can also help custodians continue to 

verify file integrity, further enhance metadata, and carry out other 

processes that ensure the success of preservation over time. 

Many core software packages are commercial products, although 

a few open source tools, like Fedora, have found a place in digital 

preservation systems. There is, however, a need for a richer set of 

audio preservation software to play synergistic roles in relation to 

the core systems. Because the market for such tools is limited, com-

mercial packages may not emerge to fill this need. 

Open source development, therefore, should be encouraged. As 

investment is required to develop software, the audio preservation 

community should support the development of needed open source 

tools. A collaborative effort is required to identify areas of greatest 

need and to garner funding and support to develop the tools neces-

sary in those areas.

Examples of software that would serve the audio preservation 

community well include tools for the following purposes: • Creation, extraction, and insertion of metadata into audio files and 

the mutual exchange of that metadata with associated database or 

collection management systems

• Conversion of proprietary EDL (edit decision list) formats of the 

most commonly used DAW platforms to a standardized format

• Creation of integrity data when files are created or ingested into 

a repository so that the data can be used to monitor the condition 

and integrity of stored files 

• Automated systems for file management, creation of derivatives, 

and dissemination of assets
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 31

• Migration of digital assets throughout their life cycle as technology and formats become obsolete 

Recommendation 2.7: 

Best Practices for Creating and Preserving 

Born-Digital Audio Files

Research, develop, and promote improved and scalable processes to package multipart and metadata-rich digital audio 

objects, and to develop (and update) practices for the transformation and management of these objects when they are 

archived for the long term. Define preferred formats (including metadata) in order to maximize the initial creation of 

born-archival files by those who produce sound recordings, 

or develop recommendations for preferred file formats, embedded and/or associated metadata, and object packaging.

Some newly created digital sound files present a number of preservation issues because of their formatting. For example, surround-sound 

or multitrack files may involve compression or structures that will 

benefit from transformation, decoding, or repackaging for long-term 

storage when ingested by an archive. Files from music composers 

may mix waveform data (including samples) with structured-audio 

elements (e.g., Musical Instrument Digital Interface [MIDI] data) that 

will demand special management over time. New recordings often 

include visual elements, ranging from camera-produced video to 

graphic-based animations, and these also require special management. For long-term management of these types of files, best practices must take into account their specific characteristics and functions.

The term born-archival refers to the creation of digital files that 

can be archived immediately; they are formatted for archiving, and 

all necessary metadata is created at the time of file creations. The set 

of best practices for managing born-digital files can be articulated in 

ways that also provide guidance to content creators.22 

Born-digital and born-archival practices have multiple stakeholders, including the National Recording Preservation Board. Other 

stakeholders include archives, both commercial and noncommercial, 

and the organizations in which they are active, ranging from AES 

to ARSC. Additional stakeholder groups include the Producers & 

Engineers Wing of NARAS; the Federal Agencies Digital Guidelines 

Initiative; and funding agencies, including federal entities (e.g., the 

Institute of Museum and Library Services and the National Endowment for the Humanities) and interested independent foundations. 

Commercial interest in this topic extends beyond the archives, as 

digital sound recordings are the central asset at record labels and 

other publishers of music and spoken word recordings; for these 

22 The Digital Dilemma reports from the Science and Technology Council of the 

Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (2007 and 2012) provide analytic and 

descriptive work on born-archival moving image content. The definition of bornarchival used here is derived from wording in The Digital Dilemma 2.
32 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

organizations, the preservation of these assets is essential to the 

companies’ long-term financial success. The development of practice 

recommendations should entail consultation with several of these 

stakeholders. One of several vehicles for promulgating recommendations will be through statements of preferred digital formats and 

metadata to be submitted for copyright eDeposit—that is, copyright 

deposits of materials published only in electronic format (see also 

Recommendation 4.3). 

3. Promoting Broad Public Access for Educational Purposes

In directing the implementation of a “comprehensive national sound 

recording preservation program,” the National Recording Preservation Act of 2000 stipulated that the program should, as one of its 

objectives, “increase accessibility of sound recordings for educational 

purposes.”23 Here, as in several other places in the legislation, Congress recognized an inextricable link between preservation and public access. 

The Act called on the National Recording Preservation Board to 

undertake a study to report on “standards for access to preserved 

sound recordings by researchers, educators, and other interested 

parties,” among other issues.24 The resultant preservation report 

made the link between preservation and public access explicit 

by titling one chapter “Preservation, Access, and Copyright: A 

Tangled Web” and acknowledging that “[t]oday, preservation and 

access have become joined, locked together in the realm of sound 

recordings”(CLIR and Library of Congress 2010, 108, 7).

The U.S. Copyright Office has similarly linked preservation and 

access in a recent report, Federal Copyright Protection for Pre-1972 

Sound Recordings. “Providing some level of access to digitally preserved works is important,” the report authors contend, “because 

without it, preservation is often merely an academic exercise.” The 

report specifies that public investment in the preservation of sound 

recordings can benefit the public only if they can access those materials. Such access is important for increased “public knowledge 

about our cultural patrimony, and for the light that these recordings can shine on the times in which they were recorded—basically, for the reasons we study film, literature, music, and any 

other product of the mind.” Invoking language from the Copyright 

Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, the report 

notes, “Access also propels the ‘progress of science’ in that current 

23 National Recording Preservation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-474), Sec. 111. This Act 

was amended by the Library of Congress Sound Recording and Film Preservation 

Programs Reauthorization Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-336).

24 Ibid., Sec. 124. The Act also linked the two concerns together in creating the National 

Recording Preservation Foundation with its mandate to raise funds “to promote 

and ensure the preservation and public accessibility of the nation’s sound recording 

heritage held at the Library of Congress and other public and nonprofit archives 

throughout the United States.” Ibid., Sec. 201.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 33

creators are able to build upon what has come before” (U.S. Copyright Office 2011, 95).25

Although preservation and provision of public access are linked, 

these two core archival tasks frequently diverge. Libraries and archives often make preservation copies of sound recording materials that are not accessible to their patrons. Many access copies of 

recordings are not of sufficient quality to be used for preservation 

purposes.

Providing access to relevant sound recording materials is a 

multifaceted challenge. For patrons of libraries and archives, access 

begins with discovering what materials exist and where they reside. 

Attempts at discovery, however, frequently leave researchers frustrated. There is no authoritative national discography documenting 

recordings produced in the United States. The lack of a centralized 

access point to the hundreds of special collections that contain recordings has proven to be an impediment to researchers. Moreover, 

cataloging for recordings often does not have the amount of detailed 

information that patrons desire (Davenport 2010, 156–164).

Rights-related issues affect many facets of preservation and access to historical recordings. Few, if any, public domain recordings 

exist in this country because federal copyright law in the United 

States does not cover sound recordings made prior to February 15, 

1972. Instead, pre-1972 recordings are subject to a variety of disparate 

state antipiracy laws that have no expiration dates and lack language 

to exempt archival copying for preservation purposes. As a result, 

a study sponsored by the Copyright Office and the National Digital 

Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program of the Library 

of Congress found that “[m]any librarians and archivists are reluctant 

to copy and disseminate older sound recordings in the face of this 

patchwork of state laws that lack well-delineated exceptions” (U.S. 

Copyright Office and the National Digital Information Infrastructure 

and Preservation Program of the Library of Congress 2008, 130). 

Instructed by Congress to investigate “[c]opyright and other 

laws applicable to the preservation of sound recordings,”26 the National Recording Preservation Board’s study, The State of Recorded 

Sound Preservation in the United States, identified two additional issues of copyright law that complicate the effort to preserve sound 

recordings and make them accessible. Many historical recordings 

are “orphan works” with no identifiable “author” to whom requests 

for permission to make them available can be directed. Institutions 

that preserve and make accessible orphan works risk lawsuits for 

copyright infringement should a copyright owner later surface. Furthermore, the study reported that strictly interpreted, section 108 of 

the copyright law prohibits preservation of a published recording 

before it has actually deteriorated so that an institution may legally 

25 The report also notes that Congress, by enacting Section 108 of the 1976 Copyright 

Act, “has recognized that the ability of certain research libraries and archives to 

preserve cultural and historical works for posterity is in the public interest” (65).

26 National Recording Preservation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-474), Sec. 124.
34 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

copy a recording only after it is audibly deficient.27 Section 108 does 

not take into account current recommended technical practices and 

excludes most recordings from access provisions that it grants for 

other media.

Institutions with recorded sound collections find it difficult to 

obtain grant funding for audio preservation without a corollary 

plan to ensure that preserved recordings will be publicly accessible. 

“Funding requests for the preservation of sound collections must 

compete against requests for preservation of other media to which 

ready access is legal,” the Board’s study reported. This “expectation 

of access” has contributed to conflicts between rights holders and the 

institutions committed to preserving sound recordings (CLIR and 

Library of Congress 2010, 7–8).

Impediments to preservation within the copyright law are not 

the only legal barriers to audio preservation in the United States. Li-

censing restrictions are preventing preservation of some of the most 

recent recordings. Many recordings are distributed as “streams” 

only; copies are not offered for sale. Because libraries cannot legally 

download those recordings, they are unable to preserve them ac-

cording to archival standards for future use. When sound recordings 

are offered for sale through the Internet as downloads, mandatory 

license agreements often restrict their use to “personal, non-commer-

cial, entertainment” only, a condition that prevents libraries from 

legally acquiring them (see Recommendation 4.4).

It is impossible to predict whether Congress will pass revisions 

to the copyright law to alleviate all of these obstacles. Libraries and 

archives must work together to create agreements to ensure that new 

recordings can be preserved legally. Sadly, there is a perception that 

the interests of research institutions are at odds with those of the 

recording industry. The tension is unfortunate and detrimental to 

education and preservation. 

The preservation and accessibility of the nation’s audio heritage 

should be a priority to all parties. Congress called for a national 

sound recording preservation program to be implemented by the 

Librarian of Congress that “shall . . . coordinate activities to assure 

that efforts of archivists and copyright owners, and others in the 

public and private sector, are effective and complementary.”28 With

-

out collaborative efforts between artists, distributors of recordings, 

and libraries and archives, the preservation of recordings made in 

the twenty-first century will be impossible, and our national heritage 

will remain at risk of being lost forever. 

The following recommendations suggest ways to broaden public 

access to sound recordings and promote preservation along three 

27 17 U.S.C. § 108, entitled “Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries 

and archives,” sets out conditions whereby qualified libraries and archives may 

legally reproduce or distribute copies of works protected by federal copyright law, 

including for purposes of preservation. Section 108(c) limits such duplication of 

published works “solely for the purpose of replacement of a copy or phonorecord that 

is damaged, deteriorating, lost, or stolen, or if the existing format in which the work is 

stored has become obsolete.”

28 National Recording Preservation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-474), Sec. 111.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 35

separate, but related avenues: (1) improvements in the processes of 

discovery and cataloging, (2) copyright legislation reform, and (3) 

organizational initiatives to facilitate legal public access to recorded 

sound collections.

Ensuring Access Through Discovery and 

Cataloging Initiatives

One of the goals of the national preservation program is to broaden 

access to preserved historical sound recordings. The depth and 

breadth of material in audio archives is such that a great number of 

resources have yet to be mined in areas ranging from acoustics, endangered languages, and history to musical performance practices. 

Although public institutions, libraries, and archives in the United 

States hold an estimated 46 million sound recordings, there is currently no efficient way for scholars to discover what sound recordings exist and where they can be found. 

Although many historical recordings reside in public institutions, making them available to researchers remains problematic 

despite the existence of digital technology that could expand access 

to these recordings to a broad range of users. Existing catalogs are 

dispersed, sometimes proprietary, frequently incomplete, and often 

hard to use. The inadequacy of holdings information and intellectual 

control of collections severely hinders research and access opportunities. Relating the difficulty of discovery to the overall preservation 

effort, the report commissioned by the National Recording Preservation Board warns, “The lack of sufficient cataloging or description of 

collections may result in underuse of institutional audio collections 

and a consequent adverse impact on allocations of funding for the 

libraries and archives” (CLIR and Library of Congress 2010, 42).

The following three recommendations suggest that effective collaborations can be developed to improve opportunities for scholars 

and the public to discover and access audio materials relevant to 

their interests: a national discography documenting the recordings produced in the United States, a national directory of recorded 

sound collections, and the formulation of best practices in recorded 

sound cataloging. 

Recommendation 3.1: 

National Discography 

Encourage the continued development of an authoritative 

national discography through the expansion of existing discography projects.

As noted earlier, some 46 million sound recordings reside in U.S. 

collecting institutions (Heritage Preservation, Inc. 2005, 40). For 

researchers, determining which of these recordings are most relevant for their studies is a daunting task at present. For collection 

managers, preservationists, and catalogers faced with the task of 
36 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

prioritizing recordings for digitization and cataloging, determining 

which recordings in their collections are duplicated in other institu-

tions can be time-consuming, if not impossible. A publicly accessible 

national discography offering authoritative documentation that de-

tails the production of recordings in the United States and the loca-

tion of preservation copies in public institutions will aid researchers 

in discovering relevant materials and will help collections profes-

sionals efficiently manage, preserve, and catalog their recordings.

The discography will provide researchers with one website from 

which to search information from multiple discographies. Acquisi-

tion specialists will consult the discography to evaluate potential 

purchases. Collection managers and catalogers will rely on the dis-

cography for authenticated information about recordings in their col-

lections. Preservationists will use the discography to track preserva-

tion masters and prevent redundant duplication. Metadata from the 

discography could be uploaded into WorldCat to benefit catalogers 

around the world.29 If legislation were enacted to bring pre-1972 re

-

cordings under federal copyright protection (see Recommendation 

3.4), the discography will help rights holders and those interested in 

reissues to establish dates of fixation and publication in order to de-

termine lengths of copyright protection.

It will take decades to develop a comprehensive discography 

that authoritatively documents the entire history of commercial 

sound recording in the United States. Important steps already have 

been taken that will provide a foundation for future work, however. 

In March 2008, the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) 

launched the Encyclopedic Discography of Victor Recordings 

(EDVR), a comprehensive discography of every acoustical record-

ing produced by the Victor Talking Machine Company. Supported 

by grants from a private endowment and the National Endowment 

for the Humanities, EDVR provides all titles, all label-credited tal-

ent, many supporting personnel, composers, and authors, and all 

recording session dates, places of recording, and issue numbers of 

published recordings.30 By the end of the current grant cycle, EDVR 

plans to have documented more than 100,000 recording sessions to 

include all published recordings through 1940 by RCA Victor (an 

antecedent of Victor) and Bluebird (a subsidiary of Victor), as well 

as all recordings produced by Victor’s predecessor, the Berliner 

Gramophone Co., from 1892 to 1900. UCSB recently expanded its 

discography activities beyond Victor-related companies by initiat-

ing the American Discography Project (ADP), a new database and 

website to be devoted to American acoustical recording, and made 

arrangements to add comprehensive documentation for recordings 

produced by Brunswick, Columbia, and Okeh.

A comprehensive national discography, of course, must go be-

yond the era of acoustical recordings. As a first stage beyond ADP, 

29 WorldCat, “the world’s largest network of library content and services,” includes 

catalog listings for collections “from more than 10,000 libraries worldwide.” See http://

www.worldcat.org.

30 See http://victor.library.ucsb.edu/

.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 37

documentation on all 78-rpm recordings should be considered. To 

allow for expansion beyond 78s, the database must be structured to 

accommodate documentation related to larger and more complex 

formats, such as long-playing records and compact discs. At a future 

stage, the discography might work best as a “wiki” site, in which 

volunteer moderators could verify proposed additions and revisions 

from public users. Holdings of access copies in public institutions 

also could be included.

To provide a structure, a discographic schema must first be created. In 2003, the ARSC Discography Committee, at the request of 

and with funds from the National Recording Preservation Board, 

began developing a universal discographic data structure (UDDS) to 

define, implement, and evaluate a data structure. This schema documents and relates the diverse data elements required to identify and 

characterize recorded sound and sound carriers. The first stage of 

UDDS will cover cylinders and 78s.

Licensing of published discographies by the national discography will be necessary, as will research to verify and expand information obtained from these sources. Access to corporate records will be 

important. Recording companies should be encouraged to preserve 

documentation about their recording activities and to make it available for this project, as well as to historians and media scholars (see 

Recommendation 4.3). 

Recommendation 3.2: 

National Directory of Recorded Sound Collections

Create a publicly accessible national directory of institutional, corporate, and private recorded sound collections.

To increase access to information about the location and types of 

recorded sound collections in the United States, a general web-based 

directory or guide to institutional, corporate, and private collections 

should be developed. The registry will allow individuals and institutional representatives to create and update entries that describe in 

very broad terms the strengths and general character of their collections. The directory can be developed quickly and, thus, would serve 

as a key tool in the short term for identifying collections. 

Many interests will be served by a publicly accessible web-based 

directory. In addition to aiding scholarly research, it will help producers locate collections with rare or unique materials (e.g., ethnic 

recordings originally issued in limited runs). Private collectors and 

stakeholders can identify institutions to serve as potential partners 

for preservation projects or as permanent repositories for their collections. Additionally, institutions with similar collecting interests will 

be able to find potential partners for collaborations in the areas of 

preservation and collection development. The directory can be created under the aegis of ARSC, which has prior experience with similar 

endeavors, but does not currently maintain a registry of collections. 

To encourage the broadest possible participation, the model 
38 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

should be scalable, beginning with very basic collections informa-

tion requiring minimal input. An institution can then expand upon 

specific areas of strength, if desired. A combination of controlledvocabulary selections and free-text opportunities will build into the 

directory some uniformity of language for searching while offering 

ways for collectors and institutions to describe the uniqueness of 

their collections.

Recommendation 3.3: 

Establishment of Best Practices for Audio Cataloging

Establish an expert work group led by the Library of 

Congress to determine data required in a catalog record, and 

develop best practices for audio cataloging with the goal of 

streamlining standards.

Scholars who use sound recordings in their research have indicated 

their difficulties in locating relevant materials. The problem of dis-

covery extends across the full spectrum of recorded sound collec-

tions, including best-selling commercial recordings and unique un-

published recordings, and is particularly acute in the case of special 

and private collections. The problem is structural and stems in part 

from cataloging practices that do not sufficiently address issues of 

access and preservation that institutions might resolve through a col-

laborative effort.31

Even for large institutions, such as the Library of Congress, the 

rules and practices for cataloging sound recordings have proven 

not to be cost-effective. It is difficult to learn the requirements and 

very time-consuming to produce the catalog records. The result-

ing records may well include data unnecessary for users while es-

sential information is omitted. For example, current catalog records 

ignore physical condition and generally do not indicate whether an 

item has been reformatted, thus impeding attempts at cooperative 

preservation.

In 2011, the Library of Congress characterized the establishment 

of “[e]fficiencies in the creation and sharing of cataloging materials” 

as “imperative.” Acknowledging an ongoing “era of diminishing 

budgets and heightened expectations in the broader library com-

munity,” the Library has advised that “information providers and 

cultural heritage institutions must reevaluate their use of scarce 

resources, both as individual organizations and as a community” 

(Marcum 2011).32

In line with the Library’s recommendation, the National Record-

ing Preservation Board should establish an expert work group to 

31 Other factors within institutions that remain challenging include the high level 

of complexity inherent in audio cataloging and the comparatively few resources, 

including staff, allocated to audio cataloging in comparison with text-based formats. 

32 In light of changes in digital technologies and the information industry, the Library 

recently organized a Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative with the goal of 

developing “a new means for capturing and sharing bibliographic data.” See Library 

of Congress 2011.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 39

delineate best practices for audio cataloging to simplify the cataloging process into a more understandable and cost-effective operation. 

Participants in the expert work group, to be led by the Library of 

Congress, should represent a variety of constituent groups, including historical audio archives, digital repositories, scholars, discographers, private collectors, libraries, relevant professional associations, 

and OCLC. To coordinate its efforts with developments beyond the 

recorded sound community, the work group should consult with 

representatives from fields such as informatics and other experts in 

the changing library community, identify possibilities for collaborative efforts, and consider whether partnerships might be developed 

with corporate entities to create and share tools and data for the 

common good.

The work group should investigate barriers to the discovery of 

audio materials. It should explore the possibility that institutions 

could adapt existing database models and discographies to their 

own uses.33 It should take into account issues related to born-digital 

recordings and electronic copyright deposits. 

The work group should focus on simplifying and streamlining 

current and emerging audio cataloging standards in the following 

ways:

• Work from existing and emerging standards rather than inventing 

new ones.

• Consider the needs of the groups represented. 

• Identify core elements of essential data, as well as nonessential 

data that may be omitted from current and emerging standards 

for sound recording cataloging. 

• Provide suggestions and solutions to facilitate the harvesting of 

pre-existing metadata.

• Take into account such “forward-thinking” topics as “Next Gen” 

catalogs.34

• Develop cataloging aids, such as decision trees and recommendations for specific genres and formats. 

• Encourage the consistent formatting of data elements across various library and archive groups through the development of rules 

for harvesting and mapping of data from various databases.

• Examine whether information on the condition and preservation 

status of recordings, which would aid preservation initiatives and 

circumvent redundant digitization efforts, should be included in 

catalog records.

33 As noted in Recommendation 3.1, the ARSC Discography Committee began 

developing a universal discographic data structure (UDDS) in 2003 to document and 

relate the diverse data elements required to identify and characterize recorded sound 

and sound carriers.

34 Next Generation (or “Next Gen”) catalogs currently under development are 

likely to provide capabilities not found in traditional library catalogs, including 

more sophisticated search abilities (such as faceted and federated searches), social 

networking activities (tagging, sharing, etc.), and more flexibility in general. 
40 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

Copyright Legislation Reform

Sound recordings have a unique legal status in the United States. 

Unlike other works, such as books, pamphlets, poems, music, photo-

graphs, drawings, paintings, and motion pictures, they were not cov-

ered by federal copyright law (Title 17) until February 15, 1972.35 As 

a result, recordings produced earlier have been subject to “a complex 

network of disparate state civil, criminal, and common laws” (CLIR 

and Library of Congress 2010, 110), a situation that complicates the 

efforts of libraries, archives, and educational institutions to preserve 

these recordings. Unless Congress revises the law, this situation will 

continue until February 15, 2067, when pre-1972 sound recordings 

are scheduled to enter the public domain (Hirtle 2012). The prospects 

for effective preservation of sound recordings by institutions holding 

large (and small) collections and increased funding to undertake this 

work would be significantly improved if sound recordings fixed36

before February 15, 1972, were brought under Title 17, as the U.S. 

Copyright Office recommends in its December 2011 report.37

Institutions with recorded sound collections also face legal chal-

lenges in making their pre-1972 recordings available to users for re-

search and educational purposes. A study sponsored by the National 

Recording Preservation Board found “that a significant portion of 

historical recordings is not easily accessible to scholars, students, and 

the general public for noncommercial purposes.” One important fac-

tor to account for this lack of availability, the study concluded, was 

that “copyright law allows only rights holders to make these record-

ings accessible in current technologies, yet the rights holders appear 

to have few real-world commercial incentives to reissue many of 

their most significant recordings” (Brooks 2005, 14).

The National Recording Preservation Act of 2000 directed the 

National Recording Preservation Board to conduct a study and pro-

duce a report on issues affecting sound recording preservation and 

35 Sound recordings fixed on and after February 15, 1972, became protected under 

federal copyright law by virtue of the Sound Recording Amendments to the 1909 

Copyright Act, enacted in 1971. See Act of Oct. 15, 1971, Pub. L. No. 92-140, 85 Stat. 

391. For a brief history of the protection of sound recordings in the United States, see 

Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property, Washington College of Law 

2009, 2–8; and U.S. Copyright Office 2011, 7–49. 

36 “Fixed” is distinguished in the federal copyright law from “published.” Title 17 

defines “fixed” as follows: “A work is ‘fixed’ in a tangible medium of expression when 

its embodiment in a copy or phonorecord, by or under the authority of the author, is 

sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise 

communicated for a period of more than transitory duration. A work consisting of 

sounds, images, or both, that are being transmitted, is ‘fixed’ for purposes of this 

title if a fixation of the work is being made simultaneously with its transmission.” 

“Publication,” according to Title 17, “is the distribution of copies or phonorecords 

of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or 

lending. The offering to distribute copies or phonorecords to a group of persons for 

purposes of further distribution, public performance, or public display, constitutes 

publication. A public performance or display of a work does not of itself constitute 

publication.” On the significance of this distinction, see Program on Information 

Justice and Intellectual Property, Washington College of Law, 2009, 4–5.

37 The Copyright Office concluded that federalization of pre-1972 recordings “would 

best serve the interest of libraries, archives and others in preserving old sound 

recordings and in increasing the availability to the public of old sound recordings” 

(U.S. Copyright Office 2011, viii).
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 41

access, including “[c]urrent laws and restrictions regarding the use 

of archives of sound recordings.” The legislation stipulates that the 

report is to include “recommendations for changes in such laws and 

restrictions to enable the Library of Congress and other nonprofit institutions in the field of sound recording preservation to make their 

collections available to researchers in a digital format.” The published report commissioned by the Board notes that “the study of the 

nation’s social and cultural history is adversely affected by the terms 

of protection provided sound recordings under current copyright 

law.” The report concludes, “Copyright reform . . . remains the key 

solution to preserving America’s recorded sound history, protecting 

ownership rights, and providing public access” (CLIR and Library of 

Congress 2010, 7, 111).

To clarify rules allowing archives and educational institutions 

to preserve and, where permissible, to make older recordings accessible, the most consequential action of copyright reform that Congress can take is to enact legislation to ensure that sound recordings 

fixed before February 15, 1972, are protected under federal copyright 

law. A number of issues that affect preservation and access can be 

resolved only after pre-1972 recordings are protected under federal 

copyright law.

As this is the first national plan for audio preservation, it is 

important that its recommendations to change U.S. laws reflect the 

interests and concerns of all potentially affected parties. Toward 

this end, the Library of Congress, under the auspices of the Packard 

Campus for Audio Visual Conservation, convened a task force on 

copyright and audio preservation comprising specialists representing archivists, librarians, academe, the record and music industries, 

and private collectors. The task force was charged with crafting recommendations for changes in the copyright law that support preservation of and access to sound recordings without having negative 

effects on rights holders and artists. 

The following recommendations were crafted by the Library’s 

task force on copyright and audio preservation.38 With one exception 

(see Recommendation 3.6, specifically on revising subsections 108(d) 

and (e) of the U.S. Copyright Law), the recommendations reflect 

consensus of the task force members. They focus exclusively on the 

responsibilities of qualified libraries and archives to preserve important sound recordings for posterity and to offer options for wider 

access that do not negatively affect the rights of performers and producers. They are issued with the intention to support the legitimate 

rights and interests of rights holders in their sound recordings and to 

avoid any harm to rights holders of underlying works.39

38 Although Recommendation 3.4 was completed after the Copyright Office report 

on federalizing pre-1972 recordings was published in December 2011, it reflects in 

general the recommendations of the Library’s task force on copyright and audio 

preservation that were issued earlier. 

39 A separate issue that needs to be addressed if older recordings are eligible for 

preservation is how to efficiently license underlying musical compositions to make 

these recordings more widely accessible to library and archival patrons (especially 

as preservation funding is often tied to the ability to make material available to the 

public). Additional legal issues, existing contract obligations, and other considerations 

may need to be addressed if these recommendations are enacted.
42 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

Recommendation 3.4: 

Federal Copyright Protection for Pre-1972 

Sound Recordings

Bring sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972, under 

federal copyright law.

Many pre-1972 sound recordings will deteriorate long before 2067, 

the year in which they will enter the public domain under current 

federal law. Sound recordings historically have been fixed on media 

that are much more fragile than many other types of copyrighted 

works. A recent survey of libraries, archives, museums, and histori-

cal societies responsible for preserving recordings estimates that 

of the 46 million recordings existing in their collections, more than 

6 million are “in need” or “in urgent need” of preservation. Many 

more may be at risk, as the institutions in the survey categorized the 

condition of more than 20 million of the recordings as “unknown” 

(Heritage Preservation, Inc. 2005, 40).40 To complicate matters, state 

laws that prohibit unauthorized duplication of sound recordings 

make no provisions for duplication for preservation purposes by li-

braries or archives.

On December 28, 2011, the U.S. Copyright Office issued a con-

gressionally mandated study on issues pertinent to extending federal 

copyright coverage to sound recordings fixed before February 15, 

1972. The Copyright Office concluded that federal protection should 

apply to pre-1972 recordings “with special provisions to address 

ownership issues, term of protection, transition period, and registra-

tion” (U.S. Copyright Office 2011, 175).

The Copyright Office’s recommendation accords with the objec-

tives of the National Recording Preservation Plan.41 Federal coverage 

for pre-1972 recordings will clarify ownership issues and specify 

terms of protection that do not vary from state to state. Coverage will 

provide certainty for qualified libraries and archives to undertake 

needed preservation copying and cataloging activities, and it will 

permit transparent rules for permissible access to these materials 

by library and archival patrons. For the first time, rights holders of 

pre-1972 recordings covered by federal law will become eligible for 

licensing payments under the Digital Performance Right in Sound 

Recordings Act of 1995—payments that are required only for trans-

missions of recordings protected by federal law.42 Clarity in the law 

also will benefit rights holders of recordings for other licensing and 

exploitation purposes. 

40 If Recommendation 2.2 of this plan is followed, comprehensive item-level appraisals 

of audio holdings will determine the at-risk status of many of these recordings.

41 The recommendation also conforms with H.R. 2933, the Sound Recording 

Simplification Act, introduced by Rep. Jared S. Polis to the House on September 14, 

2011, which proposes “to remove the exclusion from Federal copyright of sound 

recordings fixed before February 15, 1972.” This bill, which seeks to amend Title 

17 by eliminating the current subsection (c) of Section 301, has been referred to 

the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet of the 

Committee on the Judiciary. As of October 2012, no additional members of Congress 

had become cosponsors.

42 17 U.S.C. § 114(f). 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 43

The uncertain status of pre-1972 recordings under (state) common law copyright severely limits the ability of institutions to allocate resources for recorded sound preservation activities. Section 

108 of Title 17, which grants libraries and archives limited rights to 

copy federally protected post-1972 sound recordings for preservation 

and access purposes, does not currently apply to pre-1972 recordings 

because they are not covered under federal law (see Recommendation 3.6). In addition, the lack of clarity concerning copyright status 

and the inapplicability of section 108 hampers efforts to raise funds 

to save this material. 

Federal coverage as recommended by the Copyright Office 

report will allow libraries and archives to preserve pre-1972 recordings through copying to digital formats and make them accessible to 

patrons much earlier than is currently possible. Under the provisions 

suggested by the report, coverage also will provide rights holders 

the opportunity to take advantage of the economic value that pre1972 recordings may offer. The revision of the law suggested by the 

report will allow rights holders to retain federal copyright protection 

beyond the ordinary statutory period in order to “satisfy constitutional requirements of due process” in conformance with a precedent 

established in the 1976 Copyright Act (U.S. Copyright Office 2011, 

164). With careful definitions and processes to determine when a recording is eligible for an extended term of copyright, this approach 

would not impede preservation and access by libraries and archives.

Terms of protection proposed in the Copyright Office report fall 

into two categories: (1) terms for recordings published before 1923 

and (2) terms for recordings published between January 1, 1923, and 

February 15, 1972. For recordings published before 1923, which the 

report contends “would immediately go into the public domain” if 

the term of protection applicable to other types of works published 

before 1923 were to apply, the report offers rights holders the opportunity to acquire federal copyright protection for an additional 

25 years under the following conditions. During a three-year transition period, rights holders seeking to obtain the additional period 

of protection must make the recordings available to the public “at 

a reasonable price,” must inform the Copyright Office of this intention, and must ensure that the recordings remain publicly available 

at a reasonable price during the additional years of protection (U.S. 

Copyright Office 2011, 149, 177).43

For recordings published between January 1, 1923, and February 

15, 1972, the report advises federal copyright protection that would 

last for 95 years from the date of first publication and for 120 years 

from the date of fixation if the recordings are unpublished, although 

protection would not continue after February 15, 2067. To secure an 

additional term of protection to last until February 15, 2067, copyright owners must make their recordings available to the public “at 

a reasonable price”; notify the Copyright Office of this intention; and 

ensure that the recordings remain publicly available at a reasonable 

price (U.S. Copyright Office 2011, 164).

43 For a thorough discussion, see U.S. Copyright Office 2011, 149–174.
44 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

With one exception, these extended terms of protection are in 

accordance with the views of the task force on copyright and audio 

preservation convened by the Library of Congress. The Copyright 

Office’s report specifies a term of protection of 120 years for unpub-

lished recordings, a term that modifies the period of protection cur-

rently in place for other unpublished works: “the life of the author 

plus 70 years unless it is a work made for hire or is anonymous or 

pseudonymous, in which case the term would be 120 years from 

creation” (U.S. Copyright Office 2011, 150).44 However, it was the 

consensus of the Library’s task force on copyright and audio pres-

ervation, made up of librarians and archivists in addition to special-

ists representing the record and music industries, private collectors, 

and the scholarly community, that a flat 95-year term of protection 

for both published and unpublished pre-1972 recordings (other than 

those published before 1923) “would provide the simplest and most 

certain term for copyright owners and users.”45 That recommenda-

tion is in accordance with the national sound recording preservation 

program’s Congressional mandate to “increase accessibility of sound 

recordings for educational purposes.”46

A 95-year term of protection for unpublished pre-1972 record-

ings, other than those published before 1923, is not consistent with 

the length of term available for other types of intellectual property. 

Although consistency in the law often is warranted to achieve clarity 

and fairness of treatment, the distinctive history of pre-1972 sound 

recording creation and collection merits special consideration if re-

cordings from this period are to be preserved for posterity.

Most of the 46 million recordings housed in public institutions 

in the United States never have been published. Most unpublished 

recordings are unique (Tibbo 2011). Most unpublished recordings 

made before 1972 were fixed on lacquer discs, acetate tapes, or poly-

ester tapes, formats at high risk of deterioration because of chemi-

cal instability, external hazards, and replaying.47 Many do not have 

clearly identified owners who can be contacted for permission to 

preserve the material and make it accessible to the public. 

44 The Copyright Office justified the modification because of differences in the history 

and nature of sound recording creation from those of other intellectual property and 

because of difficulties in determining a term of protection based on the formulation 

for other types of work owing to the amount of time that will have passed between 

fixation of early recordings and the beginning of federal copyright protection: “the 

collaborative nature of sound recording authorship, the difficulties in calculating term 

of protection based upon the life of an author (or, in many cases, multiple authors) 

who may have died decades ago, and the likelihood that many pre-1972 sound 

recordings were created as works for hire.” Ibid., 166.

45 National Recording Preservation Board Copyright Task Force [Draft], January 8, 

2011, Recommendation 3. In comments submitted to the Copyright Office in response 

to a Notice of Inquiry regarding extending federal protection to pre-1972 recordings, 

a number of organizations and institutions representing libraries and archivists, 

including the Library of Congress, the Society of American Archivists, and the Music 

Library Association, argued that the term of protection should be limited to 50 or 95 

years. See U.S. Copyright Office 2011, 151–153.

46 2 U.S.C. § 1711.

47 For more information on the deterioration to audio carriers, see Schüller 2008 and 

Casey 2007. 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 45

Institutions responsible for preserving recordings allocate their 

limited preservation resources to materials that can be of most use 

to the research community and the general public. Limiting the term 

of protection for pre-1972 unpublished recordings to 95 years will 

ensure that libraries and archives can preserve more of these unique 

materials for present and future generations without fear of legal redress for copyright infringement. 

The Copyright Office states, “According to the House Report on 

the 1976 Copyright Act, enacting a provision that takes away subsisting common law rights and substitutes statutory rights would be 

‘fully in harmony with the constitutional requirements of due process’ provided that the statutory rights endure for a reasonable period” (U.S. Copyright Office 2011, 153). Allowing rights holders of unpublished recordings the opportunity to secure additional protection 

until 2067 on the condition that their recordings remain available to 

the public will ensure that statutory rights endure for a reasonable 

period and that constitutional requirements of due process are satisfied. It also will ensure that libraries and archives responsible for 

preserving sound recordings and making them accessible have the 

legal right to do so. 

It is important to note that the recommended extended terms for 

in-print pre-1972 recordings will be in the best interest of libraries, 

archives, scholars, and the public only if the law incorporates the 

following two restrictions on rights holders who are making their 

recordings available to the public in order to obtain additional years 

of protection: 

• Rights holders must be required to make their recordings available without unduly restrictive licensing agreements that include 

language prohibiting libraries, archives, and the public from legally purchasing them or making them accessible for research and 

educational purposes. 

Digital audio files commonly are made available through enduser license agreements that limit uses to “personal, non-commercial, entertainment only”48 (see Recommendation 4.4). Unless 

licensing agreements explicitly allow libraries and archives to acquire and preserve recordings through digital archiving and make 

them accessible to their patrons for research and educational uses, 

rights holders should not receive additional periods of federal 

copyright protection.

• Rights holders must be required to make their recordings available on a physical format (e.g., compact discs) or as digital downloads in formats of comparable quality (i.e., 44.1 kHz and 16 bit). 

For rights holders to gain extended copyright protection, 

digital streaming cannot be the sole means of satisfying the legal 

requirement for public access. Stakeholders testified in hearings 

held by the U.S. Copyright Office that streaming alone “does 

not provide sufficient access” for researchers. Many types of 

48 See Amazon MP3 Music Service: Terms of Use, http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/

customer/display.html?ie=UTF8&nodeId=200154280&pop-up=1.
46 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

scholarship and teaching that make use of historical recordings 

require listening to excerpts repeatedly, for musical transcrip-

tion and other purposes, as well as for comparisons of excerpts 

of recordings. Equally important, if not more so, access that is 

available only through streaming prevents libraries and archives 

from providing long-term preservation of recordings legally. The 

Copyright Office report concurs, stating that “[t]he Office does not 

believe that the requirement of making recordings available to the 

public should be satisfied merely by providing non-interactive 

streaming access to the works” (2011, 170).

Recommendation 3.5: 

Orphan Works

Enable recordings whose copyright owners cannot be iden-

tified or located to be more readily preserved and accessed 

legally.

The term orphan works has been adopted to describe copyrighted 

works for which copyright owners cannot be identified or located. 

Potential users of orphan works who have been unable to obtain 

permission to use the works legally often refrain from making pro-

ductive and socially beneficial use of them, fearing the possibility of 

liability for copyright infringement; this is a situation that the U.S. 

Copyright Office has characterized as “not in the public interest” 

(2006, 1). Such potential users include libraries and archives commit-

ted to preserving orphan works and making them accessible to the 

public for educational purposes. 

Legislation designed “to create a legal framework to facilitate 

the authorized use of so-called ‘orphan works’,” in the words of the 

Copyright Office, would greatly benefit the archival community (Pal-

lante 2011, 7). A legal study commissioned by the National Record-

ing Preservation Board concluded, “If such legislation is ultimately 

enacted, a limitation of liability for copyright infringement for or-

phan works could provide greater security for libraries that wish to 

copy and disseminate such works” (Besek 2009, 27).

Sound recordings that were fixed before February 15, 1972, 

however, will not be covered under orphan works legislation unless 

Congress also extends federal copyright protection to these works 

(see Recommendation 3.4). Should Congress enact orphan works leg-

islation, even in the absence of federal protection for pre-1972 sound 

recordings, it is crucial that the legislation apply to works protected 

under state statutes and common laws. 

With regard to more recent works, the Copyright Office has not-

ed that changes in copyright registration and renewal requirements 

have made it much more difficult to determine copyright ownership. 

Orphan works legislation will facilitate preserving and making acces-

sible older recordings and those produced in the more recent past.

The House and Senate considered orphan works legislation in 

the 109th and 110th Congresses. Although a Senate bill passed by 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 47

unanimous consent in the 110th Congress, a vote on a corresponding 

House bill did not reach the floor before the session ended. Subsequently, a federal court in 2011 ruled that the matter should be determined by Congress, rather than private parties, declaring that “questions of who should be entrusted with guardianship over orphan 

books, under what terms, and with what safeguards are matters 

more appropriately decided by Congress than through an agreement 

among private, self-interested parties.”49

Orphan works legislation is especially relevant to the national 

effort to preserve our recorded sound history and make it publicly 

accessible. Many recordings were issued by small recording companies that have gone out of business or cannot be located. Ownership 

is inadequately documented for many types of recordings, including 

radio broadcast recordings (for which intellectual property rights 

have not been made explicit in the broadcast itself) and many unpublished works. It is recommended that Congress address the matter of orphan works at the earliest opportunity and that, in doing so, 

it considers the challenges that libraries and archives face in preserving sound recordings and making them publicly accessible. 

Recommendation 3.6: 

Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act

Revise section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976 in order 

to facilitate preservation and expand public access to sound 

recordings.

Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976 was enacted to grant 

certain exceptions and identify specific circumstances under which 

libraries and archives can legally make copies, including preservation and replacement copies. Section 108 (along with the right of fair 

use provided by section 107) also grants crucial exceptions allowing 

libraries and archives to reproduce materials for purposes of public 

access to further private study, scholarship, and research. Although 

these exceptions have been amended over the ensuing years, they 

are still exceedingly narrow, leading the Section 108 Study Group 

appointed by the Library of Congress and the Copyright Office 

to conclude that the law reflects the pre-digital era and “embodies some now-outmoded assumptions about technology, behavior, 

professional practices, and business models” (U.S. Copyright Office 

and the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation 

Program of the Library of Congress 2008, i).50 Furthermore, all post1972 sound recordings that embody musical works are excluded 

from exemptions in subsections 108(a) and (d)–(g), while pre-1972 

recordings are wholly ineligible for any section 108 exemptions.

The Library’s task force on copyright and audio preservation 

recommends that a more comprehensive revision of section 108 be 

49 Authors Guild v. Google Inc., 770 F. Supp. 2d 666, 677–678 (S.D.N.Y. 2011).

50 Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976 was amended by the Digital 

Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 

1998, and the Preservation of Orphan Works Act in 2005.
48 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

undertaken to address issues and concerns relevant to the preserva-

tion of and access to sound recordings in the twenty-first century. 

The final report of the Section 108 Study Group set forth recommen-

dations that, if adopted, would significantly benefit the preservation 

of historical sound recordings by U.S. libraries and archives. Ad-

ditionally, the legislative changes governing eligibility and condi-

tions under section 108 recommended by the Study Group would 

be significant steps toward addressing issues related to digital tech-

nologies, including those required for preservation, research, dis-

tribution, and access. The Section 108 Study Group report has been 

duly considered alongside the recommendations cited in The State 

of Recorded Sound Preservation in the United States (CLIR and Library 

of Congress 2010) and those of the Library’s task force on copyright 

and audio preservation in formulating a course of action. 

To meet the mandate of the National Recording Preservation Act 

to preserve and increase public accessibility of sound recordings, the 

following legislative amendments are required: • Make all U.S. sound recordings, including those fixed prior to Feb

-

ruary 15, 1972, subject to section 108 of the Copyright Act of 1976.

Because U.S. sound recordings made before 1972 are not sub-

ject to federal copyright law, they are currently not eligible for 

section 108 exceptions. Legislative action on Recommendation 3.4 

would resolve this problem. As an alternative approach, should 

pre-1972 sound recordings not be placed under federal copyright 

protection in the near future, Congress should pass an amend-

ment stipulating that section 108 applies equally to all sound 

recordings—regardless of whether they are governed by state or 

federal law. 

• Expand subsection 108(a) eligibility beyond libraries, archives, 

and their employees to include other nonprofit institutions and 

independent contractors preserving recordings on behalf of non-

profit institutions. 

Exemptions afforded under section 108 are currently restrict-

ed to reproduction by libraries, archives, and their immediate em-

ployees. Museums frequently hold unique and significant record-

ed sound collections, however, and should be subject to the same 

preservation and access provisions as libraries and archives. Other 

nonprofit institutions with a public access or research component 

might be considered for section 108 exemptions as well, provided 

they meet certain functional eligibility requirements. The limita-

tions under subsection 108(a) also should be extended to include 

outside contractors and service bureaus performing preservation 

and digitization work on behalf of eligible nonprofit institutions, 

as long as certain conditions are met to safeguard the interests of 

the rights holders (U.S. Copyright Office and the National Digital 

Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program of the Li-

brary of Congress 2008, iv).
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 49

• Revise subsections 108(b) and (c), which govern the reproduction 

of unpublished and published works, to allow for the use of current technology and best practices in the preservation of sound 

recordings. 

Subsections 108(b) and (c) present several obstacles to the 

preservation of sound recordings that must be ameliorated. First, 

the three-copy limitation on reproduction must be amended to 

accommodate best practices in the digital era. Nonprofit institutions should be permitted to make a reasonable number of copies 

of both published and unpublished sound recordings for replacement and preservation purposes, which requires the ability to 

produce and archive digital files in excess of the three-copy limit 

(CLIR and Library of Congress, 2010, 122–123). Second, the narrow focus of subsection 108(c), which limits duplication solely 

to replacement copies of a published work that is damaged, deteriorating, or in an obsolete format, must be expanded. Both replacement and preservation copies should be allowed for at-risk 

recordings, and copying must be allowed before damage or deterioration has compromised the sound carrier.51 Third, the prohibition of offsite lending of digital replacement copies should be 

amended. Libraries and archives should be allowed to lend digital 

replacement copies under specific circumstances, such as when 

the original copy is in a physical digital medium that can lawfully 

be lent offsite and the replacement is in an equivalent format (U.S. 

Copyright Office and the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program of the Library of Congress 2008, v). 

• Amend subsection 108(i) so that out-of-print sound recordings 

fall under the provisions of subsections (d) and (e), regardless of 

content. 

Subsection 108(i) summarily excludes musical works and 

audiovisual works other than those dealing with news from the 

provisions of subsections 108(d) and (e), which govern access 

copies for users; this exclusion severely limits opportunities for 

private study, scholarship, and research. In addressing this issue, 

the Section 108 Study Group concluded that if subsection 108(i) is 

retained, it should be amended to “[l]imit the excluded categories 

of works to those where copying under subsections 108(d) and (e) 

might put the work at particular risk of market harm” (U.S. Copyright Office and the National Digital Information Infrastructure 

and Preservation Program of the Library of Congress 2008, xi). 

As providing limited access to out-of-print recordings under 

section 108 provisions would cause no market harm, subsection 

108(i) should be amended so that sound recordings are eligible 

51 The Library of Congress has stated, “To deliberately delay preserving a culturally, 

historically or aesthetically important sound recording until it is in a deteriorated 

condition is a foolhardy practice that could constitute malfeasance on the part of a 

professional librarian or archivist. As they now exist, Sections 108 (b) and (c) place 

recorded sound archivists who perform their duties to the highest professional 

standards, plus the libraries, archives, museums and other institutions for whom they 

work, at odds with the word of the law, if not its intention.” See Loughney 2011, 5. 
50 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

for subsections (d) and (e), regardless of content, provided they 

are out-of-print. This would make the treatment of musical sound 

recordings consistent with that of other forms of intellectual 

property. 

• Broaden the categories of “adjunct” works that may be eligible 

for subsection 108(d) and (e) treatment and use a formulation 

other than “adjunct” that captures the concepts of “embedded” or 

“packaged with.” 

If subsection 108(i) is amended so that subsections 108(d) and 

(e) apply to additional categories of works, such as sound record-

ings with musical content, additional conditions should be includ-

ed in subsections 108(d) and (e) to prevent material impact on the 

commercial exploitation of the affected works.52

• Revise subsections 108(d) and (e) to allow for the secure elec-

tronic delivery of digital copies for private study, scholarship, and 

research.53

The Section 108 Study Group concluded that electronic access 

under subsections 108(d) and (e) should be permitted if adequate 

measures are taken to ensure that access is provided only to the 

designated single user and to prevent unauthorized reproduction 

or distribution of the work. Recent technological innovations have 

created various options for streaming audio files, and a grow-

ing number of companies provide password-protected secure 

streaming services. Record companies use secure sites to stream 

recordings (or even offer downloads) to members of the press for 

publicity and review. Libraries and archives should likewise be 

allowed to use these services, or to establish their own secure net-

works, to stream out-of-print recordings to researchers. Even if the 

streaming is limited to an interlibrary loan type service (library 

A streams requested recording to library B, where the researcher 

listens onsite), this would be a major step toward providing access 

to out-of-print recordings.

• Make sound recordings fixed prior to February 15, 1972, subject to 

subsection 108(h). For sound recordings produced prior to 1961, 

make subsection 108(h) applicable in the last 45 years of their 

copyright term (rather than the last 20 years, as is currently the 

case with other works) provided that the works are not commercially 

available or cannot be obtained at a reasonable price. For recordings 

made in 1961 or after, make subsection 108(h) applicable in the 

last 20 years of their copyright term.

52 This recommendation is closely adapted from language in the Section 108 Study 

Group Report, which includes a number of proposals that address issues related to the 

impact on the marketplace by a change in the law. See U.S. Copyright Office and the 

National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program of the Library 

of Congress 2008, 106-111.

53 Not all the members of the Library’s task force on copyright and audio preservation 

agreed on this issue.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 51

This recommendation by the Library’s task force on copyright 

and audio preservation is the result of several factors. Subsection 108(h) was intended to mitigate the impact of lengthening 

copyright terms by 20 years as required by the Copyright Term 

Extension Act of 1998, which provided libraries and archives (as 

qualified in section 108) and their users “the benefit of access to 

published works that are not commercially exploited or otherwise 

reasonably available during the extended term.”54 Subsection 

108(h) recognizes that very few works are still commercially exploitable near the end of their copyright life, although many may 

be of great historical, cultural, and research importance.55

Applying subsection 108(h) to sound recordings fixed prior 

to 1972 would allow qualified libraries and archives to reproduce, 

distribute, or display in digital form a work toward the end of its 

term of copyright protection for purposes of preservation, scholarship, or research, provided certain benchmarks are met. Specifically, a library or archive could make a recording available if it 

is not otherwise subject to normal commercial exploitation by its 

owner and no copy can be obtained at a reasonable price. If either 

of these conditions apply, or if the copyright owner claims that 

either condition applies, the library or archives should not be able 

to take advantage of the exception provided in subsection 108(h).

The task force on copyright and audio preservation convened to advise on the national plan recommended further that 

Congress should make subsection 108(h) applicable to all sound 

recordings in their last 45 years of copyright term rather than in 

their last 20 years, as is currently the case with other works, provided that the works are not commercially available or cannot be 

obtained at a reasonable price. The task force agreed that applying 

subsection 108(h) to the last 45 years of copyright protection of 

sound recordings offers the best hope of providing the certainty 

and clarity that libraries and archives require to preserve recordings in their collections and make them accessible for scholarship 

or research.56

54 Copyright Term Extension Act, H.R. Rep. No. 105-452 (1998). 

55 Subsection 108(h) is currently applied to foreign sound recordings (that comply with 

the restoration provisions of section 104A), and should apply to U.S. and other nonsection 104A recordings as well.

56 The Library’s task force on copyright and audio preservation report included the 

following alternative option in their report: “Alternatively, libraries and archives 

should be able to provide access to copyrighted sound recordings during their last 20 

years of copyright, as is the case with Section 108(h) as currently written. This would 

not be as useful an exemption to scholars and researchers as one based on the last 45 

years of copyright term. Its clarity and consistency with existing law, however, makes 

it an acceptable alternative to libraries and archives, especially when coupled with 

a copyright term based on fixation and not publication (thus clarifying many of the 

uncertainties as to what constitutes the last 20 years of term). Libraries and archives 

could reproduce, distribute, display, or perform in analog or digital form a copy of 

a sound recording during its last 20 years of copyright term so long as the original 

recording is not subject to normal commercial exploitation or a copy of the recording 

cannot be obtained at a reasonable price.” See National Recording Preservation Plan 

Copyright Task Force [Draft], January 8, 2011, 6.
52 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

The longer “window” is intended in part to bring U.S. law 

into greater agreement with international practice. According to 

the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Performanc-

es and Phonograms Treaty of 1996, terms of copyright protection 

granted to performers and producers shall last at least 50 years.57

Many of the major trading partners of the United States have 

limited the term to 50 years. On September 27, 2011, however, the 

European Union passed a directive to be implemented within two 

years by member states that will increase the term of protection 

for sound recordings from 50 to 70 years.58 The European Union 

directive is not retroactive; pre-1961 recordings whose term ended 

after 50 years will remain in the public domain. To conform to 

the recent change to laws in Europe, this plan recommends that 

subsection 108(h) be made applicable to pre-1961 recordings in the 

last 45 years of their term of copyright protection and applicable 

to recordings made after 1960 in the last 20 years of their term.

The copyright status of U.S. recordings will not be affected if 

this recommendation is enacted into law; all recordings still will 

be protected. Underlying rights in musical compositions or texts 

and rights in album artwork, photographs, etc., will remain pro-

tected under the status quo copyright law. This “window” will 

allow a limited exception to copyright for the purposes of private 

study, scholarship, or research for works that are not commer-

cially available and for which rights holders have not indicated a 

desire to make them available at a later date.

The potential impact on rights holders will be minimal. The 

report on the availability of historical recordings commissioned by 

the National Recording Preservation Board found that for the peri-

od 1955 to 1959, only 34 percent of recordings of historical interest 

were available on compact disc from the owners; for earlier years, 

the percentage was much lower (Brooks 2005, 7).59 The Gowers 

Review of Intellectual Property similarly noted with regard to record-

ings sold in the United Kingdom: “Evidence suggests that most 

sound recordings sell in the ten years after release, and only a very 

small percentage continue to generate income, both from sales and 

royalty payments, for the entire duration of copyright” (2006, 52). 

In sum, these recommendations are made because many older 

recordings of great historical, cultural, and research importance 

are not available in the marketplace. The recommendations are 

intended only to allow libraries and archives to fulfill valuable 

cultural and historical functions by making these noncommercial 

57 See http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wppt/trtdocs_wo034.html

.

58 Directive 2011/77/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 

September 2011 Amending Directive 2006/116/EC on the Term of Protection of 

Copyright and Certain Rights, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri

=OJ:L:2011:265:0001:0005:EN:PDF.

59 Brooks limited his survey to “historical” recordings, “recordings in which there is 

documented interest” (3). The criterion for determining “documented interest” was 

the listing of a recording in one of 20 published discographies that are acknowledged 

reference sources, as well as a sampling of recordings included in the National 

Recording Registry (3). 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 53

recordings accessible, and only because they are not otherwise 

being made available by the rights holders. Those recordings 

that still have commercial viability will be excluded from this 

provision, as subsection 108(h) applies only to works that are 

out-of-print. 

The Library’s task force on copyright and audio preservation 

acknowledges that lengthening the period of the subsection 108(h) 

exemption beyond the term granted under the Copyright Term 

Extension Act could be perceived as having an unintended negative impact on the rights holders of underlying musical works. 

Therefore, the task force recognizes that if Congress allows libraries to make sound recordings accessible during the 20th to 45th 

years of the remaining copyright term (as opposed to only during 

the last 20 years), libraries may be required to pay mechanical 

reproduction fees to the owners of rights in the underlying work 

when such rights exist (i.e., the underlying work is not in the public domain).

The impact on the marketplace of a broader application of 

subsection 108(h) will be minimal. A library or archive could 

make a recording available under subsection 108(h) only if it is not 

otherwise subject to normal commercial exploitation by its owner 

(i.e., out-of-print and not available as a download) and no copy 

can be obtained at a reasonable price. If either of these conditions 

applies, libraries and archives may not take advantage of subsection 108(h).60 

Improving Legal Public Access to Recorded 

Sound Collections

Many rights holders have not permitted researchers or the general 

public to listen to the recordings they legally control outside the 

limited scope of research facilities maintained by legitimate research 

institutions. In the study sponsored by the National Recording Preservation Board that surveys reissues of historical U.S. recordings 

created between 1890 and 1964 (more than 400,000 were listed in 

major discographies), author Tim Brooks (2005) reports, “Experts believe that the vast majority of recordings commercially issued in the 

United States—probably more than 90 percent—still exist in some 

form” (11). Yet Brooks states, “On average, rights owners have made 

available 14 percent of the historic recordings that they control from 

the various eras” (7).

Recorded sound researchers surveyed on obstacles to access reported that many archival institutions allow patrons the opportunity 

to listen to recordings only one time because of the fragility of materials and limited staff resources. However, such policies often do 

not satisfy researchers’ needs: “Most researchers need to listen to the 

60 In making subsection 108(h) applicable for sound recordings produced prior to 

1961 in the last 45 years of their copyright terms, legislation would create exceptions 

different for sound recordings than for other types of intellectual property. In the 

interest of preservation, however, this inconsistency should be overlooked.
54 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

same passage over and over to hear the bowing technique of the vio-

linist, to transcribe a jazz riff, to compare the interpretations of several 

artists performing the same piece, or to note the changes in an artist’s 

performance over time” (Davenport 2010, 158). Travel and lodging 

costs required for visits to libraries and archives in distant areas also 

limit researchers. In the digital age, repeated reviewing of digitized 

materials and secure streaming of recorded materials to distant lo-

cales for research purposes could offer a solution to these issues, but 

institutions rarely can provide these aids to research because of re-

strictions imposed by rights owners and the copyright law.

The National Recording Preservation Board study acknowledged 

that in lieu of copyright reform, licensing agreements between public 

institutions holding sound recordings and rights holders could make 

it possible for libraries and archives to legally preserve and make 

their sound recordings digitally accessible to their users. “Creation 

of new copyright laws or licensing procedures that acknowledge 

best practices in audio preservation and assure access to audio heri-

tage is essential to ensure the preservation of that heritage and its 

understanding and appreciation by generations to come,” the study 

avowed (CLIR and Library of Congress 2010, 131).

Productive collaborations will be necessary to implement the 

following recommendations that are designed to develop effective 

ways for libraries and archives to make their collections more readily 

accessible to users: • Effective license agreements for streaming • A digital preservation network for sound recordings held by mul

-

tiple institutions 

• A labels ownership database to facilitate obtaining authorizations 

to stream recordings 

• Broadened access to the vast sound recording holdings of the Li-

brary of Congress 

• Establishment of codes of best practices to help clarify fair use 

rights of libraries and archives to preserve and make sound re-

cordings available to patrons 

Unless the issues addressed in the following recommendations 

are resolved, historical scholarship that uses sound recordings will 

continue to be limited.

Recommendation 3.7: 

Licensing Agreements for Streaming

Develop a basic model licensing agreement to allow on-de-

mand secure streaming by libraries and archives of out-ofprint recordings to researchers and the general public.

Educational and archival institutions are required to limit public ac-

cess to recordings by allowing access only within special research 

centers maintained on their premises. They are prohibited by law 

from broadly disseminating audio collections material that they have 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 55

preserved using modern digital technologies. Few institutions have 

the legal resources to develop strategies for online streaming because 

of perceived cost, the challenges involved in identifying copyright 

owners, and the difficulties in forging agreements with one or more 

record companies to stream complete recordings. For example, the 

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), and Baylor University 

have developed model websites with access to hundreds of rare, 

out-of-print historical recordings, but must limit offsite streaming 

access to samples of 30 seconds or less.61 With a practical licensing 

mechanism in place that covers on-demand secure streaming of outof-print recordings, many more rare historical recordings could be 

made accessible to researchers. 

The success of licensing agreements depends on convenient 

and accurate sources of information about the materials licensed, 

the extent of rights of the licensor to enter into the agreement, and 

assurances that the licensee will uphold the terms of the license. To 

have as broad an impact as possible, licensing should be available 

to all institutions, large and small. Owing to challenges in these areas, rights holders (typically record companies) have rarely licensed 

material that is not in great demand, nor have they offered licenses 

to educational entities at affordable rates. The Sound Recordings 

Label Ownership Database (Recommendation 3.9) will greatly assist 

with identifying rights holders of materials to be licensed. Simplified 

licensing would provide new revenues for rights holders, a broader 

spectrum of historical recordings accessible to the public, and increased preservation. 

A streamlined licensing process will result in

• Licensing costs that reflect the commercial value of a recording, 

based on two factors: (1) how long it has been out-of-print and (2) 

the number of listeners it attracts once it has been made available 

through streaming. Recordings that have been out-of-print for 

several decades should be made available free of charge or at a 

very low cost. 

• Licenses that are easily obtainable, even when there is doubt 

about the rights status of a recording (e.g., protected, orphaned, 

public domain, and cases of unknown contractual obligations to 

performers). Presently, many libraries and archives self-impose 

limitations on public access rather than risk infringing on rights 

holders’ interests. 

• New streams of revenue for record companies and other rights 

holders.

• Reduced risks to record companies from claims by other rights 

holders to proceeds.

To achieve these outcomes, the following steps are recommended:

• Rights holders should collaborate with libraries and archives to 

make information regarding their rights more freely available 

61 See UCLA’s The Strachwitz Frontera Collection of Mexican and Mexican American 

Recordings (http://frontera.library.ucla.edu/index.html) and Baylor’s Black Gospel 

Music Restoration Project (http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/landingpage/

collection/fa-gospel30). 
56 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

through a database that will serve as a central resource for label 

ownership information (see Recommendation 3.9). 

The resource will be especially useful if record companies col-

laborate with libraries and archives to define parameters of eligi-

ble recordings (e.g., range of dates, labels, commercial availability 

in digital format).

• A licensing system should be established whereby companies des-

ignate groups of out-of-print recordings eligible for licensing at a 

fixed rate. 

• The model of the Library of Congress National Jukebox should be 

expanded.62

Rights holders should be encouraged to provide free or very 

low-cost licenses to libraries and archives that wish to make 

large collections of out-of-print recordings available as streams to 

the public. As with the National Jukebox, libraries and archives 

would provide rights holders with usage statistics to allow them 

to gauge public interest in commercial reissues of individual 

recordings. Rights holders would have the right to request the 

removal of a recording from a streaming site if the recording is 

republished and it is determined that the streaming service will 

adversely affect sales.

• Archives and rights holders should cooperate in scalable digitiza-

tion projects. 

Rights holders often may be able to provide master recordings 

for digitization. Archives can provide preservation storage (of ben-

efit to rights holders) and public access (of benefit to the public).

• For pre-1972 recordings that are out-of-print, systems for pay-

ments to artists via a rights organization for streaming should be 

established, and Congress should be encouraged to pass legisla-

tion to indemnify institutions that provide streaming services 

from damages when applicable rights have been paid to record 

companies, music publishers, and artists’ representatives.

Recommendation 3.8: 

Recorded Sound Preservation Access Network 

Create a shared preservation network for access to sound 

recordings held by multiple libraries and archives.

Major audio archives across the United States hold millions of sound 

recordings that are in need of reformatting to ensure their long-term 

accessibility. To make these recordings available to researchers in a 

way that enables repeated playback without harming the originals 

through excessive wear and handling, digital surrogates must be 

created. Furthermore, because multiple audio archives hold copies 

62 See http://www.loc.gov/jukebox/

.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 57

of many recordings in need of reformatting, they should undertake 

a collaborative effort to develop a digital registry of preservation 

masters and a digital repository of access files. This approach would 

eliminate duplication of effort and ensure the best use of limited 

funding resources. 

The Recorded Sound Preservation Access Network will offer a 

secure location for the storage of derivative files of sound recordings 

digitized by partner archives and will maintain a licensing system to 

enable sharing of access copies of preserved recordings. Digital access copies will be available only to signatory libraries and archives 

that hold a physical copy of preserved recordings. Similar collaborative repositories currently exist for digital libraries and could 

serve as models or perhaps could be expanded to include audio 

materials.63

The long-term goal of the Recorded Sound Preservation Access 

Network will be to enable archives and libraries to have legal access to derivative files of out-of-print sound recordings digitized by 

members. Participants in the network will be bona fide rights holders 

(e.g., record companies, performing rights organizations) and public 

and nonprofit archives and libraries exclusively. Files in the repository will be either in the public domain or available through negotiated licenses with recording companies.

The Recorded Sound Preservation Access Network will operate 

in the following manner:

• The network will maintain a registry of preservation masters of 

audio recordings.

• The network will obtain and administer blanket licenses from intellectual property owners (e.g., record companies, music publishers) and use agreements with network participants. 

• When ownership of a copy of a recording by a member library or 

archives is designated in the registry, the licensed network participant will have access to high-quality derivative files of the sound 

recording digitized for preservation. 

• Members of the network will create preservation files of recordings and derivatives for sharing with authorized institutions,64

with accompanying descriptive metadata to allow for effective 

discovery.

• The Recorded Sound Preservation Access Network will include 

administrative metadata and procedures to ensure the security of 

the network and prevent illegal uses of the preservation files and 

high-quality derivatives. 

63 The HathiTrust Digital Library (http://www.hathitrust.org/), which provides 

long-term preservation and access to both public domain and in-copyright digital 

content (primarily books) from more than 50 major research libraries, has considered 

expanding to include non-print formats. The Digital Public Library of America 

(http://dp.la/) envisions organizing a freely accessible national digital library that 

will “incorporate all media types and formats including the written record—books, 

pamphlets, periodicals, manuscripts, and digital texts—and expanding into visual and 

audiovisual materials in concert with existing repositories.”

64 Access issues (e.g., whether offsite, in addition to onsite, access will be available) 

will need to be explored.
58 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan • Digital content in the network could include any recording con

-

trolled by owners of intellectual property that provide licenses to 

the network. 

Recommendation 3.9: 

Sound Recording Labels Ownership Database 

Create an online public registry of owners of sound record-

ing labels.

Contributors to the study of recorded sound preservation commis-

sioned by the National Recording Preservation Board observed that 

one of the greatest challenges to obtaining authorizations to stream, 

distribute, or otherwise make available historical sound recordings is 

identifying the legal owners of the recordings. Because there was no 

federal copyright protection for recordings until 1972, information 

about rights holders, as found in copyright registration applications, 

never has been compiled in a publicly accessible form. It also can be 

difficult to locate information about ownership of later record labels 

because formal copyright registration is not required legally and 

record companies frequently have changed hands. Developing an 

online public registry of owners of sound recording labels, thus, is an 

essential step in facilitating legal uses of historical sound recordings. 

As a component of the Audio Preservation Resource Directory 

website (Recommendation 1.6), the Sound Recording Labels Owner-

ship Database will include the most up-to-date information available 

about ownership of commercial record labels by corporations and 

individuals. Information should be compiled from various sources, 

including the record industry, rights organizations, expert research-

ers, and Copyright Office records. The database not only will aid 

all parties seeking to obtain permission or licenses to reproduce or 

disseminate sound recordings, but also will help establish whether 

a particular label is “orphaned.” Support for the project should be 

sought from the record industry and the National Recording Pres-

ervation Board. The database should be hosted by the Library of 

Congress in view of its technical resources to maintain the registry 

and its ability to make the registry available without charge over the 

Internet. All content will be for informational purposes only; the da-

tabase is not intended to be a legal registry of ownership.

Recommendation 3.10: 

Expansion of Public Access to Sound Recordings 

Preserved by the Library of Congress

Explore ways to make sound recordings that have been digi-

tized by the Library of Congress accessible to researchers 

throughout the United States.

The recorded sound holdings of the Library of Congress are vast; the 

Library has the largest such collection in the United States, totaling 

nearly 3.5 million recordings that embody more than 120 years of 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 59

audio history. Although the Library has digitized and made available 

on its website important early recorded sound collections, most of 

the recordings in its collections are accessible only to researchers who 

are able to travel to Washington, D.C. To make the Library’s recorded 

sound collections more widely accessible to the research community, 

a study commissioned by the National Recording Preservation Board 

proposed that “facilities for deep, repetitive, and manipulative listening” could be established in each state to provide researchers with 

opportunities to more fully explore the recorded sound history residing in the Library’s collections (Davenport 2010, 161).

The Library of Congress should investigate the best way to 

develop a national network of affiliated research and preservation 

institutions where copyright-protected materials digitized from the 

Library’s collections could be delivered to listening stations through 

secure delivery systems. Legal exemptions or licensing agreements 

will be necessary to achieve this objective. A limited pilot project 

could be developed at first, but the network should have as its goal 

the establishment of at least one Library-affiliated institution in each 

state. Funding for the initiative could be provided by state, academic, 

or local libraries; the National Recording Preservation Foundation; 

and other sources.

Recommendation 3.11: 

Code of Best Practices in Fair Use

Devise a code of best practices in fair use for sound recordings that libraries and archives can adapt and use.

“Fair use,” originally a common law doctrine, was incorporated into 

federal law through the 1976 Copyright Act as “one of the principal 

means by which copyright accommodates First Amendment values,” 

according to legal scholar June M. Besek (2009, 58). Specifically, 

section 107 of the Copyright Act stipulates that the fair use of copyrighted materials, including the act of reproducing them, does not 

constitute copyright infringement even if permissions of copyright 

owners for such use are not obtained. The law identifies purposes 

for which fair use may be applicable—“such as criticism, comment, 

news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom 

use), scholarship, or research”—and specifies factors to be considered in determining whether any particular use of copyrighted 

materials may be permitted under the fair use doctrine: “(1) the 

purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a 

commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the 

nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of 

the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the 

copyrighted work.”65

In a study commissioned by the National Recording Preservation Board, Besek asserts, “Preservation and dissemination by a nonprofit digital library or archives for scholarly or research purposes 

65 17 U.S.C. § 107.
60 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

would be the kind of use favored by the law” (2009, 9). The House 

report that accompanied the 1976 revisions to the Copyright Act spe-

cifically notes that “the making of duplicate copies for purposes of 

archival preservation certainly falls within the scope of ‘fair use.’”66

The U.S. Copyright Office report on bringing federal copyright pro-

tection to pre-1972 recordings states that “[b]ecause of limitations of 

section 108, libraries and archives increasingly rely on fair use in un-

dertaking digital preservation, and the scope of the fair use doctrine 

in this context has never been adjudicated” (2011, 84).

Despite these opinions, a recent survey of librarians found a 

“lack of consensus about applying fair use” that results in “[c]om-

promised integrity and utility of collections, for failure to preserve 

and make access copies” (Association of Research Libraries; Ameri-

can University, Center for Social Media, and Washington College 

of Law Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property 

2010, 18–19). Similarly, the Library of Congress task force on copy-

right and audio preservation has concluded that it is not “clear if 

concepts such as ‘fair use’ (section 107) may be applied to permit 

certain types of preservation or access activity.”67 Besek cautions 

that “[t]here is no formula to determine whether a use is fair” and 

warns that because “most other countries do not have a fair use 

doctrine,” streaming by a library that might be protected as fair use 

in the United States “requires consideration of potential exposure 

under foreign laws”(2009, 61).

The appropriateness of applying fair use principles to archival 

sound recording preservation activities can be determined only on 

a case-by-case basis. A code of best practices in fair use for recorded 

sound should be commissioned to aid institutions committed to pre-

serving and making accessible their recorded sound collections. Sim-

ilar codes have been developed or are under development by other 

associations related to scholarly research and publishing, creative 

communities, academic and research libraries, and teachers.68 A code 

of best practices representing a consensus of the recorded sound 

preservation community and developed in consultation with rep-

resentatives of the rights holder community should address typical 

situations that archives face when considering whether fair use prin-

ciples can apply to their activities. The code will provide guidelines 

for institutions to use when confronting specific cases and a model 

for institutions to adapt when creating their own codes.69

66 See H.R. Rep. No. 94-1476, at 73. The House report specifically refers to “preserving 

for posterity prints of motion pictures made before 1942,” but presumably fair use 

considerations also would apply to recorded sound preservation activities that 

similarly require duplication of copyrighted materials.

67 National Recording Preservation Board Copyright Task Force [Draft], January 8, 

2011, 2.

68 For examples, see American University, Center for Social Media, http://www.

centerforsocialmedia.org/fair-use. For a template that organizations and institutions 

can adapt to create their own codes, see Aufderheide and Jaszi 2011, 156–161.

69 The U.S. Copyright Office report on federal copyright protection for pre-1972 

sound recordings notes, “As cases relating to digital copying wind their way through 

the courts, section 107 will continue to evolve and libraries and archives across the 

country should be better able to create policies and practices in response. To the extent 

that these decisions come from appellate courts, libraries and archives throughout the 

United States could find themselves in a position to create national standards, rather 

than state-by-state projects, for pre-1972 sound recordings” (2011, 92). 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 61

4. Long-Term National Strategies

Preservation of the nation’s recorded sound heritage is too great a 

responsibility for any one institution. Since the nineteenth century, 

an ever-expanding array of sound recording formats and genres 

have been produced and disseminated by diverse groups. Preserving these recordings will require coordinated efforts by libraries, 

archives, corporations, and private individuals. The collection and 

preservation of born-digital recordings, which require a high level 

of management and technical infrastructure, present particular 

challenges. Funding for audio preservation and access initiatives 

is scarce. These challenges require a well-organized national effort 

on the part of all stakeholders to achieve success. Leadership by the 

Library of Congress and the National Recording Preservation Board 

will be instrumental in coordinating an effective national preservation program.

Recommendation 4.1: 

The National Recording Preservation Board

Charge the National Recording Preservation Board with 

providing assistance to the Library of Congress in coordinating and implementing national sound preservation 

efforts, and in advancing public awareness of the national 

program. 

The Librarian of Congress established the National Recording Preservation Board in the Library of Congress in accordance with a directive in the National Recording Preservation Act of 2000. The law 

identified the following as the Board’s responsibilities: reviewing 

and recommending nominations for the National Recording Registry, conducting a study on sound recording preservation and restoration, and issuing a report based on the study. With the publication of 

The State of Recorded Sound Preservation in the United States in August 

2010, the latter responsibilities of the Board were achieved.

The Librarian of Congress also was tasked by the National Recording Preservation Act to consult with the Board to “implement a 

comprehensive national sound recording preservation program, in 

conjunction with other sound recording archivists, educators and 

historians, copyright owners, recording industry representatives, 

and others involved in activities related to sound recording preservation, and taking into account studies conducted by the Board.”70 The 

Board’s expanded role as a consulting and implementing body for 

the Library of Congress will include the following tasks:

• Assist in the expansion of sound recording preservation programs 

in institutions throughout the United States. 

• Promote greater public access to historically, culturally, and aesthetically significant sound recordings. 

70 National Recording Preservation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-474), Sec. 111, as amended 

by the Library of Congress Sound Recording and Film Preservation Programs 

Reauthorization Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-336).
62 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan • Assist in the development of a coordinated national sound record

-

ings acquisitions and collections policy.

• Advance educational and professional training goals in the field 

of audio preservation.

• Disseminate reliable information about sound recording preserva-

tion to archivists, audio preservation specialists, educators, and 

the public.

• Promote public awareness of the need for preserving the nation’s 

recorded sound heritage.

• Encourage the coordination of national-level fundraising strate-

gies to identify resources and develop effective programs for 

sound recording preservation fundraising.

The Board will promote partnerships between public institu-

tions, nonprofit organizations, the recording industry, the collect-

ing community, and companies that create and distribute sound 

recordings in all genres and formats to accomplish these purposes 

and goals. The Board’s active involvement in the ongoing audio 

preservation effort as recommended in this plan will be crucial to the 

program’s success.

To address specific issues not fully covered in the plan or in ex-

isting studies, the Board, in coordination with the Librarian of Con-

gress and the staff of the Library’s Packard Campus for Audio Visual 

Conservation, will create ad hoc committees and advisory groups of 

experts in specific fields of study. These groups will keep the Librar-

ian, the Board, and the recorded sound community advised of recent 

developments, needs, and trends in recorded sound preservation 

and scholarship. These varied groups may include • Experts who can advise the Board on trends in scholarship that 

might affect audio acquisitions policies and suggest initiatives 

to promote a greater use of sound recordings as primary source 

materials 

• An expert work group to identify broad categories of recorded 

sound materials that are generally not well cataloged or “discov-

erable,” and to consider nationally coordinated efforts to improve 

access for scholars and other users

• An advisory committee that meets periodically to review and 

make recommendations concerning the national technical re-

search agenda
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 63

The National Recording Preservation Board currently 

advises the Librarian of Congress on annual selections 

for the National Recording Registry and on matters of 

policy relating to recorded sound preservation in the 

United States. Under the National Recording Preservation Plan, the responsibilities of the Board, under 

the auspices of the Librarian of Congress, will be 

expanded. The following new functions of the Board, 

described in other recommendations (as indicated), 

will be integral to the successful implementation of 

this plan: 

• Establish an Executive Leadership Committee on 

Recorded Sound Preservation (Recommendation 

4.2) 

• Develop a coordinated national recorded sound 

collections policy (Recommendation 4.3) 

• Resolve digital licensing issues of importance to 

research libraries and archives (Recommendation 

4.4) 

• Develop fundraising strategies in coordination with 

the National Recording Preservation Foundation 

(Recommendation 4.5) 

• Convene periodic conferences or meetings to assess 

the progress of the national audio preservation program (Recommendation 4.6) 

• Urge the construction of new archival storage facilities, or the conversion of existing facilities, for 

audiovisual media (Recommendation 1.1) 

• Promote the establishment of university programs 

in audio archiving and preservation, and continuing education programs for audio engineers, archivists, curators, and librarians (Recommendations 

1.4 and 1.5) 

• Assist in establishing a web-based Audio Preservation Resource Directory (Recommendation 1.6) 

• Encourage funding agencies and foundations to 

support comprehensive archival surveys of audio 

collections (Recommendation 2.2) 

• Establish an expert audio cataloging group to delineate best practices (Recommendation 3.3) 

The Expanded Role of the National 

Recording Preservation Board 
64 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

Recommendation 4.2: 

Executive Leadership Committee on Recorded 

Sound Preservation

Organize an advisory committee of industry executives 

and heads of archives, under the auspices of the National 

Recording Preservation Board and in collaboration with 

the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences 

(NARAS), to address recorded sound preservation and ac-

cess issues that require public-private cooperation for 

resolution. 

To aid in the implementation of the recommendations in this plan, 

the National Recording Preservation Board should establish an Ex-

ecutive Leadership Committee on Recorded Sound Preservation. 

Such a committee should include top executives from recording 

companies and heads of sound recording archives. The committee, 

which will meet on an ad hoc basis, will be charged with the follow-

ing responsibilities: • Ensuring a continued commitment of those at the highest level of 

the recording industry to assist the Library of Congress and the 

National Recording Preservation Board in implementing the rec-

ommendations of this plan 

• Resolving conflicts that arise between rights holders and archives 

regarding preservation and access objectives and policies; for 

example, the development of special licenses to facilitate pres-

ervation work and access (see Recommendation 4.4), and con-

sideration of the unique challenges for preservation work and 

access related to recordings produced by now-defunct recording 

companies

• Addressing new challenges that arise as regulations, laws, tech-

nology, and institutional practices regarding sound recordings 

evolve 

• Advising the Board on ways to ensure that funding for preserva-

tion will meet national needs 

• Intervening promptly in crisis situations, for example, in response 

to the identification of a collection at risk because of an emergency 

(e.g., fire or natural disaster); the Executive Leadership Committee 

could provide assistance in marshalling resources to save the col-

lection, arrange acquisition by an archive committed to preserve 

it, or develop a grant application for emergency preservation 

purposes

The composition of the Executive Leadership Committee on 

Recorded Sound Preservation is critical. Participants must be drawn 

from a level of management capable of committing corporate re-

sources to the implementation of recommendations, resolving con-

flicts, intervening in crisis situations, and addressing new challenges. 

These individuals must possess sufficient authority not only to 

speak for their corporations and nonprofit organizations, but also to 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 65

influence the actions of other leaders. Appropriate committee makeup would include record company executives at the senior level 

paired with the heads of leading libraries and archives. In addition, 

the Library of Congress, ARSC, NARAS, and other key organizations 

should be represented on the committee.

Recommendation 4.3: 

A Coordinated National Collections Policy

Develop a coordinated national collections policy for 

sound recordings to include the establishment of “partner 

archives” for receiving copyright deposits; collaborative 

efforts to collect born-digital recordings; and a strategy to 

collect, catalog, and preserve locally produced recordings, 

radio broadcast content, neglected and emerging audio formats and genres, and corporate documents.

The National Recording Preservation Board should develop a strategic plan for the national coordination of the collection of recorded 

sound to ensure that all genres and formats are acquired, preserved, 

and made accessible to researchers. The Library of Congress will 

need to collaborate with established archives and the Copyright Office to achieve these goals. Identifying, collecting, and preserving 

born-digital recordings and radio broadcast content, in particular, 

presents significant challenges.

The Library of Congress Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation is responsible for identifying contemporary recordings of 

artistic and cultural significance, and ensuring that they are acquired 

through the deposit requirements of U.S. copyright law so that they 

can be preserved and made available to researchers. Because sound 

recording publishing and distribution has radically changed in the 

twenty-first century, it has become even more challenging for the 

Library to identify and acquire all significant new releases for preservation. Increasingly, performers are producing and distributing their 

own recordings or are affiliated with independent, rather than major, 

recording companies. Many published recordings take the form of 

digital files and are available only through the Web; they are not 

published as compact discs or in other physical forms. Only a fraction of newly published recordings are registered with the Copyright 

Office and, therefore, acquired by the Library of Congress.

A plan for national coordination in the collection of recorded 

sound should include the following steps:

• To ensure that the Library of Congress acquires a greater number 

of significant published recordings through the Copyright Office, 

the Library should establish acquisition partnerships with other 

institutions that have expertise in specific genres of music and recorded sound to identify significant recordings and make efforts 

to acquire them through copyright deposit. 

Section 407 of the Copyright Act of 1976 requires copyright 

owners to deposit with the U.S. Copyright Office two copies of the 

“best edition” of copyrighted works “for the use or disposition of 
66 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

the Library of Congress.”71 As the Register of Copyrights and the 

Librarian of Congress have noted, mandatory deposit “has been 

one of the most important methods for building the Library’s col-

lections and making it the world’s largest repository of knowledge 

and creativity.”72 Tens of thousands of published recordings, how-

ever, have not been registered or deposited with the Copyright 

Office.73

Partner archives will assist the Library by identifying artisti-

cally and culturally significant recordings that should be claimed 

by the Library for copyright deposit and subsequent preservation. 

The Library will transfer to a partner archive one of the two cop-

ies of certain sound recordings it receives via mandatory deposit. 

In this way, the Library and its partner will share responsibility 

for the physical security and preservation of the recordings. The 

Library of Congress, its acquisition partners, and the National 

Recording Preservation Board should establish contacts with 

independent creators of sound recordings and major record com-

panies, and call attention of all stakeholders to the benefits of com-

plying with the deposit requirements of the U.S. copyright law.

• The Library of Congress should work with the Copyright Office 

to develop and implement as soon as possible an eDeposit infra-

structure that will enable the Library to acquire copyright deposits 

of “online-only” audio recordings (i.e., electronic works published 

and made available exclusively online) to preserve them for 

posterity.

Copyright owners of published online-only works have been 

exempt from the mandatory deposit requirement.74 Recognizing 

that “the current inability of the Library to acquire online-only 

works through mandatory copyright deposit places the long-term 

preservation of the works at risk,” the Copyright Office adopted 

an interim rule effective February 2010 allowing it to demand 

mandatory deposits for online-only works in specific categories.75

The Office issued mandatory deposit notices in September 2010 to 

a cross-section of the electronic serials publishing community to 

71 17 U.S.C. § 407(b). For a discussion of “best edition,” see U.S. Copyright Office 2012.

72 75 Fed. Reg. 3865 (January 25, 2010).

73 A survey of copyright registration records conducted for the Board’s recorded 

sound preservation study determined that only two of ten “relatively small U.S. 

record labels, each known for issuing discs of critically acclaimed ‘indie rock’ groups” 

selected for the survey registered sound recordings in 2007. See CLIR and Library of 

Congress 2010, 46. 

74 In 1978, the Copyright Office exempted machine-readable works (e.g., automated 

databases) from the mandatory deposit requirement of Title 17, as these works 

“were not widely marketed to the public.” The exemption was amended in 1989 to 

require copyright owners to deposit machine-readable works that were published in 

physical form, leaving “automated databases available only online” exempt from the 

requirement. The Office’s subsequent practice, “to interpret this category broadly to 

encompass all electronic works published only online,” was adopted “as a matter of 

convenience because, at that time, the Library exhibited neither the intention nor the 

technological ability to collect such works.” See 74 Fed. Reg. 34286-34287 (July 15, 2009) 

for a brief history of Copyright Office policies exempting online-only works from the 

mandatory deposit requirement.

75 75 Fed. Reg. 3864-3865 (January 25, 2010).
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 67

determine viable packaging and submission processes for these 

works. The subsequent submissions, each of which was unique, 

“created tremendous technical challenges” for the Library and for 

publishers who responded to demand notices.76 The Copyright 

Office has acknowledged the need to develop with the publishing 

community workable packaging standards, transmission protocols, and file structures.

The Copyright Office and the Library should make sound recordings the next category to qualify for eDeposits. Born-digital, 

file-based recording has become the predominant means of audio 

production.77 Future generations will need access to born-digital 

recordings to understand twenty-first century political, social, and 

cultural history. The Office and the Library should work with the 

recording community to develop a secure eDeposit infrastructure 

for the mandatory deposit of online-only sound recordings, an 

infrastructure in which copyright owners can be confident that the 

files they deposit with the Copyright Office will not be pirated. As 

soon as possible and with legal sanction through statutory amendment, existing legal authority, or by permission of rights holders, 

the Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation should initiate a program to methodically harvest born-digital recordings 

from websites. Partner archives could assist in recommending 

artistically and culturally significant websites and Internet broadcasts. Congress should provide adequate funding to the Packard 

Campus to build the technological infrastructure required to preserve future born-digital works.

• The Library of Congress should collaborate with the Copyright 

Office to develop a process whereby high-quality audio files may 

be deposited with the Library for secure storage and preservation 

in perpetuity as an alternate means to satisfy the requirement that 

rights holders deposit copies of the “best edition” of their published works or to serve as a supplement to that process.

According to copyright law, two copies of the “best edition” 

of a published sound recording must be deposited with the Copyright Office within three months of publication. The language 

in the law is insufficient, however, to guarantee the long-term 

preservation of born-digital recordings. Many sound recordings 

currently are distributed to the public in highly compressed audio 

formats, such as MP3, which often do not contain enough information to adequately preserve the original sound recorded. During workflows, rights holders often create files that are of higher 

resolution than those offered for sale. If the Library of Congress 

is to develop a preservation quality repository of these recordings, it is essential to adopt, through statutory amendment where 

76 76 Fed. Reg. 21043 (April 14, 2011).

77 Born-digital audio, a term used to describe all audio recorded digitally at the point 

of creation, includes works that are recorded to physical formats (DAT, CD, DA-88, 

ADAT, etc.), but more commonly refers to file-based recordings on formats such as 

WAVE (.wav) or MP3.
68 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

necessary, deposit guidelines for born-digital recordings that lead 

to the acquisition, ingestion, and long-term preservation of those 

unpublished, higher resolution files. For common monaural or 

stereo recordings, this would be 96 or 192 kHz and 24 bit, or at the 

minimum, the resolution of a commercial compact disc, 44.1 kHz 

and 16 bit. For other structures (e.g., surround sound recordings 

or multitrack materials of other types), the preferred versions for 

the collection should follow emerging general practice guidelines 

for born-digital—or better, born-archival—content, as outlined in 

Recommendation 2.7.

• The National Recording Preservation Board should encourage 

statewide and regionally based coordinated programs to collect 

and preserve locally produced recorded sound, including radio 

broadcasts. 

Locally based recordings are likely to be published in small 

quantities; or, if unpublished, are unique and in great danger of 

loss. Some states and municipalities have libraries or archives 

with official government music divisions that are natural hubs for 

coordinated efforts among content producers and archives to col-

lect and preserve recordings. In other states, such institutions as li-

braries, archives, and historical societies should be called upon to 

take the lead. In either case, statewide collecting efforts will need 

support to build and maintain cooperative preservation efforts.

The National Recording Preservation Board should help 

facilitate these efforts by identifying one or more institutions in 

each state to develop, support, and coordinate statewide coopera-

tive efforts; supporting efforts to survey recorded sound material 

produced and held in each state, including collections from radio 

stations, universities, local businesses, and local festival organi-

zations; encouraging producers to contribute their recordings 

to statewide repositories; and maintaining a national listing of 

statewide efforts and contacts through the Audio Preservation Re-

source Directory website (Recommendation 1.6).

• The Board should establish a subcommittee to develop strategies 

and tools to collect and preserve radio broadcast content. Among 

the subcommittee’s first actions should be the convening of a 

symposium on the challenges to preservation of American radio 

broadcasts and possible solutions.

Radio programs make up a significant portion of the nation’s 

recorded cultural history and encompass an array of genres, in-

cluding news, music, drama, variety, soap operas, sports, quiz 

shows, public affairs, presidential addresses, community affairs, 

religious programming, propaganda, and educational shows. Al-

though many libraries and archives have acquired collections of 

historical radio broadcast recordings, there have been few system-

atic efforts to collect contemporary commercial radio broadcast 

recordings, and to document and preserve the entire range of ex-

tant broadcasts in private and public collections. The Corporation 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 69

for Public Broadcasting’s American Archive project is an attempt 

to preserve and manage public radio and television broadcast 

materials; however, there has been no systematic effort to collect 

American commercial radio programming at the national and local levels.78

• Neglected and emerging audio formats and genres that have not 

been sufficiently collected and preserved should be identified and 

coordinated acquisition efforts adopted.

Neglected audio formats and genres include materials so 

common that they may not seem valuable (e.g., advertising jingles, sound effects, background music). They may not conform to 

current criteria for aesthetic or historical value (ambient sound or 

industrial machine noise), or they may be useful primarily for research and diagnostic purposes in scientific fields (e.g., zoological 

studies, medicine). Such formats and genres fall beyond the range 

of current archival acquisitions policies. To gather input regarding neglected and emerging audio formats and genres that should 

be collected and preserved, the National Recording Preservation 

Board will seek expert advice on a continuing basis from audioproducing communities; scholars in sound studies and acoustics; 

and other relevant user communities, including sound artists, audio engineers, and scientific and industrial organizations.

• Corporate records and documentation on the production and 

distribution of sound recordings should be preserved and made 

accessible to researchers, preservation specialists, discographers, 

librarians, and archivists. 

Recording company documents can provide invaluable information to archivists and media scholars who study the history of 

recorded sound. Corporate records can be useful to preservationists not only in identifying recordings, but also in setting priorities for recordings to be preserved. Documentation of corporate 

recording activities will be essential to the compilation of an authoritative National Discography (Recommendation 3.1). Accurate 

information concerning production can help scholars interpret 

cultural trends. Many corporate records, however, have been lost 

or destroyed, and surviving records often are not accessible to 

outsiders. 

The Executive Leadership Committee on Recorded Sound 

Preservation (Recommendation 4.2) should encourage recording companies to preserve documentation about their recording 

activities. The Committee should discourage the destruction of 

documents until a panel of scholars and preservationists have had 

an opportunity to examine them and determine their relevance 

for preservation and scholarship. The Committee should encourage proper care and storage of documents, promote the donation 

of documents to institutions that can care for them, and discourage excessive restrictions on access to documents that have been 

placed in institutions. Archives and libraries should attempt to 

78 See http://www.cpb.org/features/americanarchive/.
70 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

acquire recording company corporate records whenever the op-

portunity arises.

Recommendation 4.4: 

Preservation of Twenty-First Century Recordings

Develop strategies that will enable research libraries and 

archives to collect and preserve culturally significant re-

cordings that are currently restricted by end-user license 

agreements.

Many of the most recently created recordings are at the greatest 

risk of loss because of changes in the publication and distribution of 

sound recordings. Physical copies of commercial recordings are be-

ing rapidly replaced by digital audio files distributed online by thirdparty companies (e.g., iTunes, Amazon, eMusic) through end-user 

license agreements that limit uses to “personal, non-commercial, en-

tertainment” only.79 With some digital files, the purchase is not even 

classified as a “sale.” Under the terms of the license, the content re-

mains the property of the provider, and all uses are governed by the 

terms of the license. In the near future, it appears likely that much 

new music will be distributed via the “cloud,” with users permitted 

access privileges only. 

These licensing agreements effectively make it impossible for 

research libraries and archives to legally purchase copies of filebased recordings, while simultaneously preventing legal educational 

use of these recordings in the classroom and impeding preservation. 

Because licenses trump copyright law, section 107 and 108 provi-

sions for libraries and archives—meant to serve the public good 

and ensure the availability of works over time—do not apply.80 Fur

-

thermore, private collectors, who are most adept at discovering and 

documenting emerging genres, may never legally be able to place 

their digital audio files in an archive, no matter how rare or at risk 

their collections may be. If this licensing problem is not resolved 

soon, the bulk of the nation’s culturally significant recordings from 

the twenty-first century will be held privately by companies and in-

dividual artists who may lack incentives or resources for long-term 

preservation. 

Resolving these digital licensing issues will require a concerted 

effort on the part of library and scholarly organizations with a vested 

interest in preservation and access. Strategies that should be consid-

ered include the following: • Advocating for educational use clauses in end-user license 

agreements. 

Representative library and scholarly organizations (e.g., 

ARSC, MLA, the Society for American Music) should work with 

music industry representatives to develop flexible yet mutually 

beneficial agreements that meet the needs of all constituencies. 

79 See Amazon MP3 Music Service: Terms of Use, http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/

customer/display.html?ie=UTF8&nodeId=200154280&pop-up=1. 

80 See 17 U.S.C. § 108(f)(4).
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 71

The National Recording Preservation Board’s Executive Leadership Committee on Recorded Sound Preservation (Recommendation 4.2) should be charged with facilitating discussions, beginning with a review of licensing agreements and business models 

between recording companies and vendors, and followed by a 

sustained effort to develop agreements for educational use and 

preservation. In addition, the Board should work with library and 

scholarly organizations to broadly publicize the issue in order to 

reach independent artists and smaller online music distribution 

companies. 

• Developing model agreements for licensing permanent digital 

music downloads to libraries and archives and initiating a pilot 

project to test outcomes. 

Currently, several library subscription services offer ondemand streaming access to a catalog of preselected music, as 

well as fulfillment services that provide a limited selection of 

downloadable music files, designed to meet the needs of public 

and smaller academic libraries. Research libraries and archives, 

however, must have the ability to individually select, purchase, 

and preserve commercially distributed digital audio files as permanent digital downloads (PDDs) to ensure preservation and 

meet the needs of a broad range of scholars.81

A pilot project should be undertaken whereby one or more 

research libraries develop a consortial agreement with specific 

recording companies that would allow a library participating in 

the agreement to purchase preservation quality digital audio files 

(e.g., uncompressed WAV) for PDD. This option also might include a provision that allows on-demand streaming access outside 

the library as long as certain conditions are met, such as restricting 

access via user authentication to university faculty and students, 

and obtaining appropriate digital media licenses with SoundExchange; the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP); Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI); and SESAC. The Executive Leadership Committee on Recorded Sound Preservation 

(Recommendation 4.2) should be charged with facilitating discussions to establish this project. The pilot project would lay the 

groundwork for future endeavors between public institutions and 

private interests by identifying major hurdles likely to arise with 

regard to licensing, downloading, access, and associated costs. 

81 According to the Harry Fox Agency, “A permanent digital download (PDD) is each 

individual delivery of a phonorecord by digital transmission of a sound recording 

(embodying a musical composition) resulting in a reproduction made by or for the 

recipient which may be retained and played by the recipient on a permanent basis. 

PDDs are sometimes referred to as full downloads or untethered downloads.” See 

http://www.harryfox.com/public/DigitalDefinitions.jsp#20.
72 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

Recommendation 4.5: 

Fundraising for Sound Preservation

Sustain the growth and success of the national preservation 

effort through coordinated fundraising strategies involving 

the National Recording Preservation Board, the National 

Recording Preservation Foundation, and grant-making 

programs. 

Funding for recorded sound preservation in the United States has 

been characterized as “decentralized and inadequate” (CLIR and 

Library of Congress 2010, 4). For commercially produced recordings, 

the responsibility for preservation lies with corporate rights holders. 

For orphan and unpublished works with no identifiable rights hold-

er—most of the 46 million recordings held by American libraries, ar-

chives, and museums—funding is scarce. To mitigate this situation, 

all parties interested in historical sound recordings must take a more 

active role than they have taken to date in identifying resources and 

developing programs to fund the preservation of our audio heritage. 

Without such commitments, much of this heritage will be lost for-

ever. The National Recording Preservation Board and the National 

Recording Preservation Foundation should lead in these endeavors, 

but these institutions cannot successfully assume this formidable re-

sponsibility alone.

Congress gave the Foundation, a nonprofit federally chartered 

corporation, the mandate to “further the goals of the Library of Con-

gress and the National Recording Preservation Board in connection 

with their activities under the National Recording Preservation Act 

of 2000.” Specifically, they empowered the Foundation to “encour-

age, accept, and administer private gifts to promote and ensure the 

preservation and public accessibility of the nation’s sound recording 

heritage held at the Library of Congress and other public and non-

profit archives throughout the United States.”82

The Foundation is authorized to receive annual appropriations 

from Congress not to exceed the amount that it raises through pri-

vate sources and through state and local governments. In accordance 

with the National Recording Preservation Act, the Library of Con-

gress should seek from Congress an allocation of funds to match the 

contributions that the Foundation receives. 

The National Recording Preservation Board, working in conjunc-

tion with the Foundation, should take the following steps to facilitate 

fundraising for audio preservation: • Encourage public and private grant-making organizations to 

expand their mandates to include preserving historically and cul-

turally important sound recordings in the collections of publicly 

funded libraries, archives, and museums, and facilitating access to 

these recordings. 

The Foundation should actively consult with and disseminate 

information to public and private grant-making organizations in 

82 National Recording Preservation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-474), Sec. 201.
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 73

an effort to encourage them to expand their mandates and address 

the challenges inherent in preserving the nation’s sound recording 

heritage. The development of a broad range of funding programs 

covering both large- and small-scale preservation, access, research, 

and training projects should be considered to meet the needs of a 

wide range of stakeholders. The Foundation should provide guidance to grant-making organizations on technical issues, as well as 

on legal issues related to the provision of public access to sound 

recordings preserved by grant funds.

• Devise strategies to encourage contributions to fund recorded 

sound preservation from profit centers throughout the music and 

recording industry, including recording companies, artists’ performance rights organizations, broadcasters, web audio services, 

and others. 

Web audio services might encourage their customers to make 

voluntary contributions to audio preservation when they pay to 

download songs. Contributions of as little as one cent—in many 

cases, this would increase the purchase price of a recording from 

99 cents to one dollar—would add up to substantial amounts if 

enough people added the charge to their purchases. 

• Engage public relations and fundraising professionals to guide 

and help sustain fundraising efforts, including the development of 

strategies to raise public awareness. 

It is imperative to the success of any fundraising and publicity 

campaign that professionals be engaged, whether on a pro bono 

basis or through a paid relationship, to guide and help sustain 

these efforts. These experts could be consulted to articulate goals 

and methods; assist with the development of public awareness 

strategies and resources; and assist with private and public fundraising initiatives, including grassroots efforts to maximize individual giving. 

• Develop a roster of “artist ambassadors” to publicize and support 

efforts to preserve America’s sound recording heritage. 

Musicians and other creators of sound recordings capable 

of drawing broad media coverage will be essential to the online 

campaign and fundraising activities of the National Recording 

Preservation Foundation. Public service announcements featuring recognizable faces and voices can enhance publicity efforts. 

During performance events, concerts, or celebrity-hosted parties 

around the nation, the artist ambassadors should convey the need 

to support the preservation of America’s recorded sound history 

and culture.

• Engage industry professionals, stakeholders, educators, and 

members of the public in developing a range of activities that will 

contribute to overall public awareness of the history of recorded 

sound and related preservation issues. 
74 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

A multigenerational approach, with an emphasis on resources 

and activities that make use of social networking, can reach a 

variety of audiences: educators, the media, the music and sound 

recording industry, private collectors, archives and libraries, 

government entities, and the general public. Possible activities to 

celebrate the history of recorded sound include tie-ins with es-

tablished events—such as National Record Store Day, United Na-

tions Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) 

World Day for Audio-Visual Heritage, African-American Music 

Appreciation Month, and the annual announcement of selections 

to the National Recording Registry.

• Encourage and promote programs that concentrate on the preser-

vation of specific forms and genres of recordings in order to ob-

tain support from businesses and individuals with vested interests 

in those forms or an appreciation of specific genres.

• Encourage funding to support cataloging projects. 

Even with the streamlined cataloging processes recommended 

in this plan (see Recommendation 3.3), additional funding is need-

ed to process the massive amount of uncataloged audio material 

in library and archival collections. The Board should encourage 

funding agencies to support cataloging projects that encompass 

significant holdings in categories prioritized by the Board’s expert 

work group on cataloging (see Recommendation 4.1). Agencies 

should also consider funding for nationally coordinated catalog-

ing efforts in keeping with the prioritized categories.

• Encourage funding agencies to support the development of audio 

preservation service bureaus (i.e., for-profit or nonprofit entities 

that provide audio reformatting and restoration services), espe-

cially in underserved areas of the United States, to lower costs and 

expand the national preservation capacity.

• Encourage more foundations to establish simpler grant applica-

tions for smaller grants.

Recommendation 4.6: 

Assessment of the National Audio Preservation Program

Under the auspices of the Library of Congress National 

Recording Preservation Board, convene meetings or a con-

ference of major stakeholders on preserving America’s re-

corded sound heritage. 

Periodic meetings that include major stakeholders will be helpful 

to assess progress made toward resolving preservation and access 

issues that have been identified within this plan. A national confer-

ence will strengthen communication and cooperation among all par-

ties interested in overcoming obstacles to preserving and providing 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 75

public access to historical recordings, including rights holders, public 

archives, and grant-making organizations. The conference also will 

help publicize the successes of the national audio preservation program derived from this plan and call attention to ongoing long-term 

challenges for preserving the nation’s recorded sound heritage.
76 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

References

Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. 2007. The Digital 

Dilemma: Strategic Issues in Archiving and Accessing Digital Motion 

Picture Materials. Hollywood, CA: Academy of Motion Picture Arts 

and Sciences. Available at http://www.oscars.org/science-technology/

council/projects/digitaldilemma/.

Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. 2012. The Digital 

Dilemma 2: Perspectives from Independent Filmmakers, Documentarians 

and Nonprofit Audiovisual Archives. Hollywood, CA: Academy of Mo-

tion Picture Arts and Sciences. Available at http://www.oscars.org/

science-technology/council/projects/digitaldilemma2/index.html.

Association of Research Libraries; American University, Center for 

Social Media, and Washington College of Law Program on Informa-

tion Justice and Intellectual Property. 2010. Fair Use Challenges in 

Academic and Research Libraries. Available at http://www.centerforso-

cialmedia.org/sites/default/files/documents/pages/arl_csm_fairusere-

port-final.pdf.

Audio Engineering Society. 2009. AES17-1998 (r2009): AES Standard 

Method for Digital Audio Engineering—Measurement of Digital Audio 

Equipment (Revision of AES17-1991). Available at http://www.aes.org/

publications/standards/search.cfm?docID=21.

Aufderheide, Patricia, and Peter Jaszi. 2011. Reclaiming Fair Use: How 

to Put Balance in Copyright. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Besek, June. 2009. Copyright and Related Issues Relevant to Digital Pres-

ervation and Dissemination of Unpublished Pre-1972 Sound Recordings by 

Libraries and Archives. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Infor-

mation Resources and Library of Congress. Available at http://www.

clir.org/pubs/reports/pub144/pub144.pdf.

Brooks, Tim. 2005. Survey of Reissues of U.S. Recordings. Commis-

sioned for and sponsored by the National Recording Preservation 

Board of the Library of Congress. Washington, DC: Council on Li-

brary and Information Resources and Library of Congress. Available 

at http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub133/pub133.pdf.

Casey, Mike. 2007. The Field Audio Collection Evaluation Tool (FACET). 

Format Characteristics and Preservation Problems, Version 1.0. Trustees 

of Indiana University. Available at http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/proj-

ects/sounddirections/facet/downloads.shtml.

Council on Library and Information Resources and Library of Con-

gress. 2006. Capturing Analog Sound for Digital Preservation: Report of 

a Roundtable Discussion of Best Practices for Transferring Analog Discs 

and Tapes. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Re-

sources and Library of Congress. Available at http://www.clir.org/

pubs/abstract/reports/pub137.

Council on Library and Information Resources and Library of Con-

gress. 2010. The State of Recorded Sound Preservation in the United 

States: A National Legacy at Risk in the Digital Age. Commissioned for 
The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan 77

and sponsored by the National Recording Preservation Board of the 

Library of Congress. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources and Library of Congress.

Davenport, Nancy. 2010. Obstacles to Access and Preservation in 

Recorded Sound. Appendix C in Council on Library and Information 

Resources and Library of Congress, The State of Recorded Sound Preservation in the United States: A National Legacy at Risk in the Digital Age. 

Commissioned for and sponsored by the National Recording Preservation Board of the Library of Congress. Washington, DC: Council 

on Library and Information Resources and Library of Congress.

Dooley, Jackie M., and Katherine Luce. 2010. Taking Our Pulse: The 

OCLC Research Survey of Special Collections and Archives. Dublin, OH: 

OCLC Research. Available at http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2010/2010-11.pdf.

Federal Agencies Audio Visual Digitization Working Group. 2011. 

Assessment Report and Initial Recommendations. Available at www.

avpreserve.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/FADGI_Audio_EvalPerf_Report.pdf.

Federal Agencies Digitization Guidelines Initiative (FADGI). 2012a. 

Audio Analog-to-Digital Converter Performance Specification and Test 

Method: Guideline (High Level Performance). Version 1.0, August 20, 

2012. Available at http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/audio-visual/documents/ADC_performGuide_20120820.pdf.

Federal Agencies Digitization Guidelines Initiative (FADGI). 2012b. 

Audio Analog-to-Digital Converter Performance Specification and Test 

Method: Introduction, August 20, 2012. Available at http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/audio-visual/documents/ADC_performIntro_20120820.pdf. 

Gowers, Andrew. 2006. Gowers Review of Intellectual Property. Norwich, England: HMSO.

Heritage Preservation, Inc. 2005. A Public Trust at Risk: The Heritage 

Health Index Report on the State of America’s Collections. Washington, 

DC: Heritage Preservation, Inc. Available at http://www.heritagepreservation.org/HHI/HHIfull.pdf.

Hirtle, Peter. 2012. Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the 

United States, 1 January 2012. Available at http://www.copyright.

cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm.

International Association of Sound and Audiovisual Archives. 2005. 

Safeguarding the Audio Heritage: Ethics, Principles and Preservation Strategy IASA-TC 03. Available at 

http://www.iasa-web.org/tc03/ethics-principles-preservation-strategy.

International Association of Sound and Audiovisual Archives. 2009. 

Guidelines on the Production and Preservation of Digital Audio Objects

IASA-TC 04 (Second Edition). Available at http://www.iasa-web.org/

tc04/audio-preservation.
78 The Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan

Library of Congress. 2011. A Bibliographic Framework for the Digital 

Age (October 31, 2011). Available at http://www.loc.gov/marc/transi-

tion/news/framework-103111.html.

Loughney, Patrick L. 2011. Library of Congress Comments in Re-

sponse to: Copyright Office Notice of Inquiry Pertaining to Federal 

Copyright Protection of Sound Recordings Fixed Before February 

15, 1972 [Docket No. 2010-4], January 31, 2011. Available at http://

www.copyright.gov/docs/sound/comments/initial/20110131-PatrickLoughney-Library-of-Congress.pdf.

Marcum, Deanna. 2011. Transforming Our Bibliographic Frame-

work: A Statement from the Library of Congress (May 13, 2011). 

Available at http://www.loc.gov/marc/transition/news/frame-

work-051311.html.

Pallante, Maria A. 2011. Priorities and Special Projects of the United 

States Copyright Office, October 2011–October 2013. Washington, 

DC: U.S. Copyright Office. Available at www.copyright.gov/docs/

priorities.pdf.

Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property, Washing-

ton College of Law, American University. 2009. Protection for Pre-1972 

Sound Recordings under State Law and Its Impact on Use by Nonprofit 

Institutions: A 10-State Analysis. Prepared under the supervision of 

Peter Jaszi with the assistance of Nick Lewis. Washington, DC: Coun-

cil on Library and Information Resources and Library of Congress.

Schüller, Dietrich. 2008. Audio and Video Carriers. Recording Principles, 

Storage and Handling, Maintenance of Equipment, Format and Equipment 

Obsolescence. Available at http://www.tape-online.net/docs/audio_

and_video_carriers.pdf.

Tibbo, Helen R. 2011. Society of American Archivists, Comments in 

Response to the Notice of Inquiry Concerning Protection of Sound 

Recordings Fixed Before February 15, 1972, January 19, 2011, 1-2. 

Available at http://www.copyright.gov/docs/sound/comments/

initial/20110124-Society-of-American-Archivists.pdf.

U.S. Copyright Office. 2006. Report on Orphan Works: A Report of the 

Register of Copyrights. Washington, DC: Library of Congress. Avail-

able at http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/orphan-report.pdf.

U.S. Copyright Office. 2011. Federal Copyright Protection for Pre-1972 

Sound Recordings: A Report of the Register of Copyrights, December 2011. 

Available at http://www.copyright.gov/docs/sound/pre-72-report.

pdf.

U.S. Copyright Office. 2012. Best Edition of Published Copyrighted 

Works for the Collections of the Library of Congress, Circular 7B (Re-

viewed 09/2012). Available at http://www.copyright.gov/circs/

circ07b.pdf.

U.S. Copyright Office and the National Digital Information Infra-

structure and Preservation Program of the Library of Congress. 2008. 

The Section 108 Study Group Report. Available at www.section108.gov/

docs/Sec108StudyGroupReport.pdf.