With a diminished financial incentive to publish, Follett is concerned that our scholars, academic institutions and publishers will not continue to freely and actively create and publish new information and express new ideas. If such valuable information and expression may be appropriated without reasonable compensation being paid, Follett believes that academic publishing as we now know it may indeed perish. This case is vitally important, because this Court's decision involves the balance of power between the copyright owners and the users of copyrighted materials. Academic authors and publishers will be less willing to create textbooks and other educational materials if there is no financial incentive. To stifle such activity would disserve the Constitutional mandate to promote science and the progress of useful arts through copyright protection.
Coursepack publishing is a rapidly growing business.
More and more frequently, coursepacks are replacing textbooks. Michigan Document Services, for example, advertises that coursepacks can be used to replace a conventional textbook. A market and legal analysis demonstrates that a for-profit publisher of coursepacks copying relatively substantial portions of copyrighted works without obtaining the permission of copyright owners does not constitute fair use. Coursepack publishers such as Follett, who respect the rights of copyright owners, pay fees to publishers for the right to use the copyrighted material as part of its coursepacks. Press v. Michigan Document Servs.