And so tonight, we're going to start in chapter 4 and just continue to work through. And I'm amazed that the sovereignty of God in this is that we sort of get a double dose between what we're looking at in the morning in Galatians, or in Acts, rather, chapter 13, and then how this dovetails and fits in so well with Galatians in chapter 4. Just a really good study, and the two are just excellent counterparts. And so we'll get more information and a lot with respect to the role that law plays, that kind of thing. So we'll look at that more closely tonight. But tonight, our text is Galatians chapter 4 and verses 1 through 7. And the title of the sermon is From Slaves to Sons, From Slaves to Sons. And let's begin reading the text together. Again, Galatians 4 and verses 1 through 7. So the Bible says, Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father. Even so, we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world, but when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth his son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law that we might receive the adoption as sons.  Therefore, you are no longer a slave, but a son. And if a son, then an heir of God through Christ. Let's pray together. Father in heaven, we praise you, Lord, that you have brought us out of slavery under the law, brought us out of slavery to our sin, brought us out of bondage. We praise you, God, for the glorious truth in Scripture that we are adopted into the family of God, and that we are sons. And if sons, then heirs. We are heirs of the promise, heirs with Christ. And we thank you for that, Lord. It is just a beautiful thing to behold, God, to just an incomparable, inconceivable, unspeakable blessing. We praise you and thank you for it, God. Thank you for this great salvation. And thank you for this text of Scripture, Lord, and I pray now that by your spirit that you would just apply this to our hearts and our minds. God, help us to just be bathed in the word of God so that we can live more faithfully to you, live more faithfully by your word, be sanctified by it. Lord, conformed into the image of Christ by it. Thank you, Lord. Please just attend the preaching of your word with your spirit. And Lord, sanctify those here. There are any here that are still in slavery, in bondage to sin. God, please open their eyes and show them what it means, Lord, to become sons and heirs of promise. We thank you for this time together, Lord. And we pray that it'd be edifying to the saints, and convicting Lord to the sinner, pleasing in your sight. In Jesus' name, we pray. Amen. So we're looking at Galatians 4 verses 1 through 7, in the title of this sermon, from slaves to sons to sons. And here in Galatians, we've been going through, hearing Paul teach on the relationship between law and faith, this contrast between trying to be right with God through works of the law, and then truly, biblically, the salvation that comes through faith in Christ. Now, so far through the letter to the Galatians, Paul has really been saying the same thing in many different ways. And we need that a lot, don't we? I need to hear truths from the Word of God. I need to hear them spoken to me frequently over and over and over again. I need that for the rest of my life. As Peter said, he stirs us up by way of reminder, looking back at those things. We constantly need that. And this is Paul doing that here again in Galatians beginning in chapter 4. He takes the same concepts, the same contrasts, and he continues to teach them to us in various ways, giving us various perspectives of how these things fit together so we can learn them and apply them. And I am thankful to God for that. This is helpful. And so we're going to take a look at another perspective here tonight on this same contrast, this issue of salvation by faith, not by works, and also this issue of slavery to sin, slavery to the law that's being set up here. Now, he continues this analogy that he's already started of passing from being under a custodian, or being under a babysitter, so to speak, but a babysitter with a rod, and then freedom from that and being under grace no longer under the law. And so he continues this analogy here, and tonight he's going to take that another step. But in a sense, the way this has been set up before, or thought of before, is that this is similar to an understanding of a bar mitzvah. I don't know if we've talked about that before, but when you have a bar mitzvah, when a Jewish child, a Jewish son, is raised up in a Jewish household, there comes a point. It's in the end of his 12th year, his 12th birthday, the first Sabbath after his 12th birthday, this Jewish son is taken through a bar mitzvah. And basically, the bar mitzvah is saying, in essence, that he's transferring responsibility for the son from the father to the son himself. And it's the son now taking responsibility for his own life, taking responsibility for his own sin, his own standing before God. And basically in the bar mitzvah, the son says and he attests and he vows to follow the Lord and follow his commandments. And he's doing that of himself. He's no longer under a custodian, no longer under the paitagagas that we talked about before, no longer under the tutor. Now, in essence, he's free. In essence, he has the legal rights given him now as an individual, no longer under his father. And so he's going to carry that farther. Paul is here in the letter to the Galatians with his idea of sons and heirs, freedom from the law, and we're going to look at that. As some of you and me at 1.2, we have lived lives as a slave and not lived our life as a son. If you've come to faith in Christ, then by virtue of repentant faith in Christ, you are a son. Now, if you remember before your conversion, you lived as a slave, right? You were a slave to your sin. In essence, if you're going to be made right with God, being in Adam under the law, your only hope of being right with God was by perfectly obeying the commands. That was the only hope that you had and you can't do it. Even by your original sin in Adam, it was impossible for you to be right with God based on your own efforts, based on your own merit. So in a sense, under law, you were hopeless. You were under the law, under the tyranny of the law, under the tyranny of sin. But when you are set free from law, set free in Christ, now you are no longer under the law as a way of securing right standing with God. You're now under grace by faith in Christ. Now it's Christ that provides the righteousness that you need. You're no longer under the custodian. You're no longer under bondage. Now you're free in Christ. And now it's the law of liberty because freely out of grateful hearts, out of loving hearts for Christ, we keep his law. It's now the law of liberty, no longer a law of bondage. Still the law and still something that we have to follow that we need to live by. God commands us to do that. But here we see this now coming out from under slave ship, coming out from under bondage. We're going to see tonight the life of a son.  And that's one of the promises that come with that. So first of all, he sets up law here as the custodian. It is equated with bondage. We see that through this whole section and it brings slavery. If you're under the law, you're under that custodian, under that tutor, then you are under bondage. You're under slavery. And this equates with slavery to sin. If you're under law, law shows you your sin and you're under bondage, under slavery to sin. But now when you place your faith and trust in Christ alone to save you, you're brought out from under the bondage of law by faith in Christ. And therefore, by virtue of you no longer being a slave to the law, you are now free, adopted into the family of Christ. And if adopted, then you're sons. And that sonship we're going to see in this passage is evidenced by a couple of things. One, it's evidenced by a gift of the Spirit of God.   We talked about those this morning with Acts 13, last couple of weeks, that who are the true offspring, the true sons and daughters of Abraham? Those who come by faith to Christ and are saved by God's deliverer and they inherit the promises. So here in this section from verses one to seven, Paul's going to give us first an illustration. He's going to illustrate this truth for us using an analogy and we're going to look at that. Then he's going to apply that to you and I personally. And then there are going to be implications from that. So first point one on the notes are that you are slaves and sons both by the sovereignty of God. And if we're in chapter four, look at verse one. Now, I say that the heir as long as he is a child does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all. So we're slaves or sons by the sovereignty of God. And in here in verse one, this is you're a minor or your anapias is the degree is as you are destined to be. He is an heir as long as he is a child that does not differ at all from a slave, though he is a master of all. First of all here, you're a minor or a child or an infant. That's the meaning of that word and an heir, even though you haven't yet attained to that. And here's what I mean with that with the sovereignty of God. If you can't take this analogy too far, but here's the analogy of a child under a tutor. Eventually that child is brought out from under the tutor and now is free while he is under a tutor. It's as if he differs and nothing at all from a slave. If you think about it, when a child has an inheritance, the child hasn't yet gained the inheritance, even though the inheritance is his, right? He grows up under a father, ordinarily he has to wait for the father to die. But if the father dies or if he inherits the inheritance, gets the promised inheritance, then it's his, even if he's a child that still belongs to him, you see?  If you're among God's elect, then from before the foundation of the world, you have predestined for you an inheritance, a promise, and it's a glorious inheritance. That's been given you by God from before the foundation of the world.  You haven't attained to that inheritance yet. You differ nothing at all from a slave. You're the same as a slave. That's sort of the point of verse one here. Now I say that the heir, as long as he's a child, an infant or a minor, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all.  You are under the law currently, and under the law, you're no different than a slave to the law, even though you have a great inheritance coming. And so first, that is what he's talking about here. You're an heir that you've not yet attained the promise. Now this forecasts those that are living under the law are in bondage. If you're not yet an heir, you've not yet inherited that you're living under bondage. And this is compared to a slave under someone else's authority. Now, the main point of this is who are those that will inherit? Who are those that move from being a child or a slave, rather, to being a son? And we'll see that as we go, right? But number two, verse two here, slaves to sons by the sovereignty of God, this happens at God's appointed time. He says that they are no different from a slave, though he's master of all, but in verse two, but that person, that child is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father. This is an appointed time. Like we said, ordinarily, you'd have to wait till the father dies. This is at a time that is predetermined by the father. This is emphasizing God's control of history, control of redemption. His sovereignty over salvation, his sovereignty over inheriting the promise. This is God the father in control of what happens. Now, my dad, when I was growing up, I remember if he said this once, he said it a thousand times, he goes, I brought you into this world and I can take you out. And he always said that as a threat. That means a spanking was coming soon, right? This is like that in the sense the father is sovereign over the child. Even when the child hasn't yet attained to the promise and is no different than a slave, the father is in control of when that happens. The father, like we talked about this morning, is in complete control of all of redemptive history, including yours. And it happens at the appointed time. And so, think about it this way. Prior to Christ, maybe you're here and you don't believe that you're converted. You've not put your faith in Christ alone to save you.  Maybe you're not sure. If you are elected by God, foreknown by God, and you are right now in slavery under the law, you haven't yet attained to the promise. But when God determines the appointed time, you put your faith in Christ and you attain to the promise, you go from being a slave under bondage to the law now as a free son of God and inheritor of the promise. And that happens at God's appointed time. Now, if you think about it this way, God being in control of all of redemptive history from start to finish. We looked at that in depth this morning, that from Genesis 1 through God raising up Christ as a savior until now with you in your own conversion, God from start to finish is completely sovereign over all of that. It is by the appointed time, by the appointed predetermined act of a sovereign God and salvation that you come to faith in Christ. If you think about it that way, being that sovereignly in control of all of redemptive history, then certainly you can trust God with the particulars of your life, right? Certainly, absolutely you can trust God with a job, with finances, with health, with your marriage, with your kids, with everything you can trust God. And it's just laid out. If God is sovereign in redemptive history that way and sovereign over your salvation, then he is sovereign over all things. And in all things can be trusted. We can trust him with everything in the very particulars of our life. But this appointed time here, it's appointed time until that you're under that guardian, that stewardship. Oikonomos is the word. Oikos meaning house, namas meaning law. It's like laws of the house. It's what you're under. You're under house law, right? Under house arrest, so to speak. Under the law until the appointed time of God when God has appointed for you to be saved. And in this case, what we're specifically talking about here until God appointed Christ. And he talks about in the fullness of time doing that until the time appointed by the Father. And so this is all under the sovereign control of God. And if you're gonna be slaves to sons, that's by the sovereignty of God. But now point two, you are slaves to sons through freedom from the law. First, according to the sovereignty of God, but now slaves to sons through freedom from the law. Look at verse three. Even so, we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world. Okay, now it starts off even so we. Meaning that word literally in the Greek is in the same manner. In the same manner, we were children. We're in bondage under the elements of the world. That elements there, stoikaia, it's many different ideas of what that word means. What elements means there. There are a lot of different ideas that the commentators put forward. One is that these are just the elemental principles of the world. Are three main enemies, the world, the flesh and the devil. And these elements are just the world elements, the world system run by the devil. And they were under those fundamental principles. Another opinion put forward is that these are angelic powers or demons. We see that in a couple of places in scripture. The principalities, the powers they were under outside of Christ. But then two, Paul uses this exact term, stoikaia, elsewhere in scripture. 1 Corinthians 10 talks about those principalities, those powers being idols and those idols being demons that people worship. But the most common usage of this word was relating to elements. Those elements, natural elements that burn up with a fervent heat in the end times. Earth, wind and fire. I'm totally against that because earth, wind and fire didn't come into place until the 70s. And I didn't care for their music much anyway. Earth, wind and fire, it's not the band. But what this word also means in scripture is rudimentary or elementary things. It was used a lot for like the alphabet, the ABCs. When you were learning very rudimentary, very elementary things like your ABCs, that was this word stoikaia was used for that. And if you think about this word stoikaia in relationship to a child under a custodian, that makes sense, right? A child under a custodian learning elementary or rudimentary things. In a sense, if you think about that, the disciple, not yet a disciple, a child under law learning rudimentary things. What are the rudimentary things that the law teaches you? You can't please God in and of yourself by your own merit. You're hopeless. So you learn that rudimentary principle through the law. The law teaches you the truth about your own condition, your own state outside of God until you're no longer under that condition and now under grace by faith in Christ. You're no longer under the tutor. Now you're no longer under law under grace. And so it relates to that is what it looks like in scripture. Rudimentary, elementary kinds of things. This is not equivalent to law, these elementary principles, but it's really closely associated. It closely associates it here and it's really similar to Colossians 2.8. Turn to Colossians real quick. Let's take a look at that. Colossians 2, a few pages to the right. But those under these elements of the world and in the same way that they, when they are under the law, they weren't free. They were in bondage, all right? And in Colossians 2, down in verse 8, and it says, To beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic, there it is, principles, so Ikea of the world and not according to Christ. These basic rudimentary philosophies of the world, understandings of the law, just those principles. That's basically what it's talking about. Another good place to look at would be Roman 7. Look at Roman 7. Turn back to Roman 7. And look at verse 1. Now keep in mind, slavery under the law means and equals is equivalent to slavery under sin. When you're under law, you're simply in sin, apart from Christ. You are in bondage to sin. Roman 7, beginning in verse 1. Or do you not know, brethren, for I speak to those who know the law, that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives? Then he gives an analogy here. For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she's released from the law of her husband. So then, if while her husband lives, she marries another man, she'll be called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is free from the law so that she is no adulteress, though she's married another man. Therefore, my brethren, verse 4, here's the point. Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ that you may be married to another, to him who was raised from the dead. And here's the purpose of that, that we should bear fruit to God. For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death. But now we've been delivered from the law, then set free from the law. See that? Not no longer in the bondage of the law. Having died to what we were held by so that we should serve in the newness of the spirit and not in the oldness of the letter. This, in verse 3, back in Galatians, we were enslaved to the law. We're enslaved under that tutor until time appointed by the Father when we were set free. Right? So here, verse 3, even so, when we were children, we were in bondage under the elements of the world. Now, he sets up the illustration for us in verse 1 and 2, talking about a child who hasn't yet inherited the promises. Now here in point 2, slaves to son through freedom from the law. Apply that truth to yourself. When you were minors, children, infants, under the law, when you still needed that custodian, when you still needed that babysitter, so to speak, you're over here enslaved to sin under law. But then now, verse 4, under point 2 here, you're set free in Christ. Look at Galatians 4, verse 4. But when the fullness of the time had come, do you see the analogy there, the comparison talking about the time appointed by the Father? We see the same thing in verse 4. But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth his son, born of a woman, born under the law. Now, this fullness of time here is a new era. This is a new era in Christ, a new era that was preached by John the Baptist, preceding the coming of Christ, the face of his appearance. We looked at that this morning. And it's also, we see that in the Acts Sermon. We also, Ephesians 1-10 talks about it. It talks about the dispensation of the fullness of time. When the fullness of time had come, God raised the Savior and God sent his son. Now that too, like we talked about this morning, it lends credence to that issue of this being the apex of God's redemptive history, the culmination of all history. But you think about the fullness of time coming and then God raises Christ. And so that everything in history looks forward to Christ, we look back to Christ, Christ is the culmination of all redemptive history. This is the fullness of time that's being talked about here. There's another place where Paul talks about it. Look at 1 Corinthians, 1 Corinthians chapter 10. It's the fullness of time here in 1 Corinthians 10, the end of the ages. Look at 1 Corinthians 10 and beginning in verse 1. And Paul says, moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all of our fathers were under the cloud and passed through the sea. Now, in the same way that Paul this morning in Acts 13 goes through the history of Israel. Paul's going to do that here as well to give you an example. Verse 2, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. All ate the same spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink for they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them and that rock was Christ. That's interesting, right? They're in Moses and this is the rock that followed them, Christ. Verse 5, but with most of them God was not well pleased for their bodies were scattered in the wilderness. Now these things became our examples. That's one reason that Paul in Acts 13 was preaching through this history. They became our examples to the intent that we should not lust after evil things as they also lusted and that we do not become idolaters as were some of them as it is written that people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play. Verse 8, nor let us commit sexual immorality as some of them did and in one day 23,000 fell. Nor let us tempt Christ as some of them also tempted and were destroyed by serpents. Nor complain if some of them also complained and were destroyed by the destroyer. Now all these things happened to them as examples and here it is, they were written for our admonition. Upon whom, now this is our admonition, upon whom the end of the ages has come. That end of the ages is the fullness of time. We are those upon whom the end of the ages or the fullness of time in Christ has come. We see in retrospect, we look back on the apex of God's redemptive history. They were looking forward to it, but this is this fullness of time. This is when God sent forth his son and this was deliverance from the law, freedom from the law and freedom from sin that was only possible through the cross of Christ. And that's why the cross and that's why his resurrection is the apex of God's redemptive history. It has to be that way. Now it says here in verse 4, he was born of a woman, which is another way of saying that he was fully human, fully man. He was fully God and fully and completely man. I was talking with a brother and not a brother. A while back we were talking and he just, he couldn't get past that idea that he was a man and he wasn't a man. If he was a man, he had to have a sin nature. Just doesn't understand scripture. He lived, the Bible says here next, born under law. He lived under the law and yet was without sin. That is the issue at play here. Christ had to be fully God and fully man. Here he was born of a woman, fully human, born under the law, under the same temptation, under the same oppression of the law and yet completely without sin. As one who lived under the law himself, he could take the curses for us in all ways, tempted like we were, yet without sin. And if he took that curse on himself, then he was able to buy his perfect sinless life through the substitutionary atonement. He could redeem or deliver those who were captives to law and sin and subject to death. Look at Hebrews 2. We're going to see that a little more clearly. Hebrews 2, he had to be fully human and he had to be born under law and Hebrews 2, look down in verse 14. Here we see this picture of children again, but these are the spiritual seed of Abraham that are being talked about. Verse 14, inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared in the same that through death he might destroy him who had the power of death that is the devil and release those or deliver set free, right? Loose them who through fear of death were all their lifetimes subject to bondage. For he indeed does not give aid to angels, but he does give aid to the seed of Abraham. Therefore in all things he had to be made like his brethren that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself has suffered being tempted. He is able to aid those who are tempted. And so here living under the law himself, living under that tyranny of the law and yet without sin he's able to deliver and redeem those who are under the law and who sin. And so he needed to be perfect and sinless. We are set free then verse four. We're set free in Christ. We're set free out from under the bond woman as it says in Galatians four, I believe it is set free as children of promise in Christ. So we are slaves to sons through this freedom from the law. But now in verse five back in Galatians in verse five, this slaves to son sons through freedom from the law. We were enslaved. We were free in Christ. But then in verse five, we're delivered to adoption. Look at verse five. He when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his son, born of a woman born under law to redeem those who were under the law. In order that we might receive the adoptions as sons. Now this word under those who were under the law. We see that word under Hupa all the time in Galatians. It's a common word and it's used continuously as something oppressive. You're under something oppressive. You're under law in Galatians three and in Galatians three, twenty three in Galatians four, four under the curse in Galatians three, ten under sin in chapter three, verse 22 under that custodian in chapter three, verse 25 under the elements of the world in chapter four, verse three, the law and sin has people under oppression. You're under tyranny. When you are under the law or you're under sin, you're under oppression. You're under oppression. You're under the tyranny of law, the tyranny of sin. And that's something to be delivered from. It's something to be saved from. We have to be delivered and saved from that. And so in verse five, Christ redeems us out from under, delivers us out from under that. And he does that through his substitution. That word is ex agoradzo ex agoradzo. It's delivered. It's liberation for you and I. You're in Christ that came at the cost of Christ's own life. It came at the price of his substitution at the price of his crucifixion. And it says there in order that we that we there being plural means in context here Gentiles to especially in the letter to the Galatians. This was not just the Jews. But this we here is referring verse five to Gentiles to you and I to redeem those who were under the law that we you and I might receive the adoption as sons. If God in the fullness of time raises up a savior to you and you turn from your sin and put your faith in Christ, then you receive by God's promise by God's fulfillment of his promise adoption as sons. If you've been delivered, then you are adopted into God's family. If you're adopted into God's family, then you are sons. You become a part of the family of Abraham, the spiritual seed of Abraham. Now, many of you may have come out of families that are dysfunctional. Every family to some degree or another is completely dysfunctional compared to the glorified, the glorious family that we have in heaven with God as our father with Jesus Christ as our in-sense spiritual brother and heir, right? That family is perfect and beautiful. Our families are often dysfunctional and full of sin. Our families defile the picture of a genuine family. But what we have to do here, our families are to point to Christ. Our families are to point to the ultimate family, the perfect family. Our roles as husbands and wives, as mothers and fathers are to point the direction toward the perfect father, the perfect family, the perfect adoption. It's to point to that. That comes through union with Christ. It comes through incorporation into Christ. When you are made one in Christ, baptized into Christ, then you are adopted into the family. And this adoption here, this is the theology of adoption or the doctrine of adoption. That basically means that there are no outside of Christ. There are no natural sons and daughters. There are no, we all must be adopted and we're adopted through Christ. Now, here in verse 5, this was God's plan all along. His plan was, when the fullness of time had come, to redeem those who were under the law that we might receive adoptions as sons. He was going to redeem those under the law in order that, for the purpose that, His purpose that, we might receive adoption as sons. This was God's plan all along. God's plan to redeem a people, a special people to Himself, zealous for good works, that would be adopted into His family as sons of God, ares, joint ares with Christ. This was God's plan. And we will, as adopted sons and daughters into that family, will worship and praise God forever and eternity as part of that family. And that is an awesome thought, an awesome promise. But that's point two, that you are slaves to, to sons through freedom from the law. And this slaves to sons happens through Christ's exodzerazo, its deliverance, His redemption, His substitution on our behalf. And then if we are delivered, if we are redeemed, then we become sons of God. If sons, we're adopted into God's family. We're a part of that family. But the next, we're slaves to sons with guarantees. We're slaves to sons with some promises, with some evidence or proofs given here. Look at verse six.  Now this is this sending here, this sending of the spirit that is expressed, that sending of the spirit is expressed by the spirit here crying out, Abba, Father. And what does that look like? Go back to Romans eight, Romans eight. Let's see this same concept expressed another way Romans eight and look down in verse 12. This sending, sending of the spirit expressed here by acclamation of God as our father. Romans eight, look at verse 12. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors not to the flesh to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh, you will die. But if by the spirit you put to death the D to the body, you will live. For as many as are led by the spirit of God, these are the sons of God. If you're a son of God, you get led by the spirit of God. For if you, for you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you receive the spirit of adoption there. That doctrine of adoption is again by whom we here cry out Abba, Father. It's a different perspective on the same thing. They're same. They're similar expressions for the same truth. When you have the spirit of God or when the spirit of God is in you, both the spirit who also says here groans with utterances that we're unable to speak, the spirit groans for us, intercedes for us before the father, but also you with the spirit of God in you cry out Abba, Father. And that Abba there, Father, it reflects this intimate family relationship between a son or a daughter and their father. It's not a spirit again of fear. Therefore, there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus. It's not that same spirit any longer. This is as adopted sons into the family of God, genuinely an intimate familial relationship with God as your father. And Christ taught the disciples to pray that way. That's the way we're to pray. And if you think about it that way as a genuine disciple of Christ, if you're in Christ and you, and you have the spirit of God and you are casting all your cares on him.  And you're trusting in him because he works all things for your good. And really, I mean, that's what that relationship is to be like. When you come to Christ and you are made sons and daughters of God through faith in Christ, you're adopted into God's family. And that relationship with God the father is that warm, loving, gentle, it's that familial intimate relationship with God as your father. And that's reflected in the fact that we can completely trust him. We can express love for him and gratitude to him, joy in him. He expresses to us great care and that he works all things for our good. He provides all our needs. It is now, you know, from an earthly standpoint that you respect your earthly father. I love my dad, but I respect my dad. And my dad, when I was still under the custodian, so to speak, my dad had the power of the rod over me, right? But you have that familial relationship. You love your father, you love your mother, or that's the way it was intended to be. And so in the same sense, when you are brought into right relationship with God and adopted into God's family, you have that same relationship with God. Now, we have and you and here may have examples in an earthly family that are horrible examples of what that's supposed to be like.  Some people have difficulty making the transfer from one relationship to what a true biblical relationship with God or a father should be like. And sometimes, even if you haven't had a familial example or situation like that, you still have the tendency as a disciple of Christ to view God as this ogre father who carries a cattle prod around, just waiting for you to step out of line, right? You can't have, that's not the kind of relationship that we're to have with God. If you're a disciple of Christ, then God as your heavenly father, that we need to respect him and in Scripture, the way Scripture describes it, we're to fear him. Because the chastening of God is not pleasant for a time, but as the Bible says, it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness, that chastening is no fun, and that's the consequence of your sin against him. And so you need to have that respect, that fear of God in the sense that I don't want to sin against him. But at the same time, it's that loving abba father relationship with God that's in view here. It's this crying out of the heart that God as our familial, intimate, loving father. And that's in that close, I don't go so far as to say daddy, but it's that type of understanding, all right? It's a, I don't believe it goes that quite that far, but that familial, loving father kind of relationship there. Now, that, the spirit then says cries out. This is Crodzo is the word there. That's a loud earnest cry. That's the earnest, diligent, fervent cry of your heart, abba father. Now that word here in this context too, in this situation expresses a longing, right? Expresses a great desire, expresses an earnestness. It conveys here a desire for truth, a desire for perseverance, a longing for sanctification, a longing to please him. That becomes the desire of your heart is that kind of relationship. Now this too, a lot of folks will, will have in view here some kind of chronological order to this. That first you are justified and made sons, and then sort of chronologically later, you have this relationship with a father in this way and you're adopted into his family. There's no chronology here. This all happens simultaneously. When you are, when you are justified, you are adopted. When you are saved, when you are converted, you automatically become sons of God. If sons of God and adopted into his family and heirs of the promise and that all comes. Now this crying out of the spirit happens for a couple of reasons. This is one of the guarantees that's given here. This is the spirit confirming, authenticating, ratifying, giving evidence of your sonship. If you're a son of God, then the spirit's going to confirm that. If you're a daughter of God, then the spirit within you is going to confirm that.  Now the spirit does that in multiple ways. If you have no interest in the things of God, then you don't have the spirit of God. If you have no hatred or just utter despising of your sin, then you don't have the spirit of God. If you have the spirit of God, if you've been adopted into his family, then the spirit confirms and authenticates your adoption by giving you a hunger and a thirst for righteousness. By giving you a hatred of sin. By giving you a love for God's word. That you delight in his word. You delight in the things of God. You love by the spirit of God in you God's people. You want that fellowship. You want that relationship, that closeness. You have a love for people being saved. You want to see people come to faith in Christ. You want to see people genuinely converted.  And that's a guarantee that's given by the spirit of God in us. But then also now verse seven, back in Galatians, if you are a son, if it's been confirmed by the spirit, then you're also an heir. Look at verse seven. Therefore, you are no longer a slave, but a son. And if a son, then an heir of God through Christ that therefore in verse seven there is referring to the entire section that just went before versus one through seven. That's the illustration of slaves to sons of child children who are under the custodian to inheritors of the promise. It involves the application of that to you and I specifically. And then also here it's the therefore it refers to the whole section. You're no longer a slave, but a son. And if a son, then an heir of God through Christ. So who inherits the promises made to Abraham? The sons of God do. The heirs do. Those adopted into the family of God do. Who inherits the promises made to Abraham? The spiritual seed of Abraham. Those are the ones who inherit it. And so you got to ask yourself is where are you in that?  It's just as simple as that. If you're a genuine disciple of Christ, you're no longer under the dominion of the law any longer as a way of being right with God. You are adopted into God's family. You have the spirit of God by the grace of God. You have the enablement from God to live the Christian life and to be pleasing in a site to obey the commands of God. You're no longer under law under the tyranny of law under the tyranny of sin. You're now adopted into Christ's family into God's family. You have the spirit giving evidence of that. It's the spiritual seed of Abraham that inherit the promises. Those who by repenting of their sin and putting their faith in Christ now live wholeheartedly for Christ.  So now here, verse seven, the fullness of time has come. If you have repented, put your faith in Christ, then God's fullness of time, so to speak, has come for you in the sense that you're under grace. You're no longer under law. You've been redeemed. You've been purchased by Christ. You've been delivered exoddorado from that dominion of law and sin and now been adopted into his family. You've been redeemed from under the law. If now you are adopted into God's family, then you've received the gift of the spirit and you have God's spirit at work in you. And that should be evidenced in the gifts of the spirit. Should be evidenced in the fruits of the spirit. Should be evidenced by the work of the spirit in you. And if the gift of the spirit has been given to you, then you are heirs of the promise. Now, like we talked about earlier, our families are often dysfunctional, often defiled by sin. God's family is not that way at all. We've got to let that truth sink in. If you're a disciple of Christ, if you're not a disciple of Christ, and you need to let this truth sink into your heart and mind that you need to be. The promise that you need is the promise made by God to Abraham of eternal blessings in Christ. And in order to be right with God, you need Christ and you need his righteousness.  Then as a disciple of Christ, you've got to allow the truth of that adoption to sink into your heart and mind in order to live the Christian life. If you are still as a disciple of Christ attempting to live under the dominion of law, then you're not acting like a son of God.  You're not acting like God as that familial intimate father. You're, again, back over here under the custodian again. And maybe you like it that way. Maybe you've got legalistic tendencies that way. But the disciple of Christ, in order to live victoriously in Christ, we've talked about that before, that comes through living by faith. The life that I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God who died and gave himself for me. The life that we live, we live by faith. But that's understanding faith in relationship to this issue of adoption that we are in God's family and that literally in God's family is our Heavenly Father. There's that example, right? That Christ gave in Scripture of an earthly father. When someone, when his son comes and asks for bread, he won't turn and give him a stone. How much more will our Heavenly Father care for us, right? So in that sense, living the Christian life, if you have obviously cares and concerns, you cast your cares on him because he cares for us.  But also, if you're adopted into the family of God and you're walking by faith in Christ, then God can be completely trusted with your battle with sin, with your assurance of salvation, with your living for him. And we should. This is not this passage of Scripture and passages like it are never an excuse to live in sin ever. You can look page to page from cover to cover in Scripture and there is never an excuse for sin in Scripture, never. But as a disciple, if that's your desire, if you have the Spirit of God, you hunger and thirst for righteousness, then the great desire of your heart is to live a life that is pleasing to him. And in order to live a life that is pleasing to him, that has to be done in faith. It won't be done in your own effort. It's done by faith in Christ. But let that wash in this truth of adoption into God's family with God as your intimate Heavenly Father who loves you and cares for you and wants for your sanctification more than you do yourself. He's predetermined that you will be conformed into the image of His Son. That's a guarantee. If you're in Christ, Christ purchased that truth with His own blood, will you trust Him with it? Now that comes, sanctification is synergistic. Salvation, monogistic in the sense that it is God alone.  Knowing for a fact that it's all God and the work of God's Spirit in you. And by God's Spirit in you, that same Spirit that cries out Abba Father, cry out with that Spirit when you get into difficulty. Cry out with that Spirit when you're faced with great temptation.  When you face hardship and trials that you don't see a way out of, that you don't see a way through or past that you feel as though the end of time has come. You know, this is it. I'm gonna throw in the towel here. When you reach that point, then the Spirit of God in you, if you've just allowed this truth to sort of bathe your understanding of the Christian walk, then the Spirit of God in you cries out Abba Father and you trust Him in all of those circumstances. That's living by faith. That's living by faith in the Son of God, that's living by faith through our Father God for help in all those things. He is our very present help in times of need, in times of danger. And that's the way we're to live. We're not naturally a part of that family. If you're not in God's family, adopt that as sons in that way, then you are children, as the Bible says in Ephesians, of wrath. You're not naturally in God's family outside of faith in Christ, repentant faith in Christ, out of sight of that salvation, your children of wrath. And then too, the Bible tells us, gives us the truth that if God gives us salvation in Christ, if He sends Christ to the cross to shed His blood so that He can redeem for Himself sons and daughters out from under the law in order to be adopted into His family, as sons and daughters as children of God, and adopted into His family in order to inherit the promises, then as the Bible says, will He not also freely give you all things? That is a glorious promise from God. If you're a son of God, a daughter of God, then God freely gives you all things, and He will. And so He can completely be trusted. You can completely entrust all of your life to Him because He's our Heavenly Father. We're going to be looking at this issue of adoption more as we work through chapter 4, but it's just that idea that in living the Christian life, that God takes care of everything. If you'll just trust Him, if you'll just believe Him, if you'll just follow Him, and the difficulties that you have with circumstances, with sin, you can trust Him with those too. And you give all of it to Him and He blesses you as the Heavenly Father would. When you come to Him for bread, He doesn't turn around and give you a rock. God blesses with help because He's your Heavenly Father. Let's pray. Father in Heaven, God, we praise you and thank you for this doctrine of adoption in Scripture. It is a beautiful thing, Lord, and it's awesome that we can, just with boldness, Lord, anytime that we want to, come before you, enter the throne room and just say, Father, we'll cast our cares on you, Lord, and lay our petitions at your feet, in your lap, Lord, and that you are a loving Father that when we go to you for help, that you don't turn to us with a stone, Lord, but that you give that help liberally without reproach, not in that you are just a gracious, merciful, loving Heavenly Father and that we as your adopted children, God, praise you and thank you. Lord, it's an awesome thought that the veil just rent into from top to bottom that we have entrance before you that way, access before you that way. You're not a God who's far off, God, but you are very near as a perfect Father in a perfect family situation. We praise you and thank you for it, God. Do you rejoice in that? I pray, Lord, that just increasingly, Lord, as you by your grace, by the work of your spirit, sanctify us, grow us, mature us, we'll learn more and more how to trust that, how to live in an understanding of that truth, how to live by that as we walk in the power of the Spirit by faith in Christ. We'd have a great joy, peace, understanding of this truth and scripture of our adoption as sons. You as our Heavenly Father. So thank you, Lord, for that glorious gift that you've given us, Lord, and that you have already saved us, God redeemed us out from bondage in our sin through Christ, provided that substitutionary sacrifice, Lord. Thank you for that. But then, as you've said, we're not freely giving us all things, or that you've adopted us. If we're sons, then we're heirs of promise. God, thank you for that glorious truth, and we greatly await, not anticipate that glorious time where we'll enter that rest. Lord, praise your name for all eternity. We love you, Lord. We love you, our Heavenly Father. It's in the name of Jesus Christ that we pray. Amen.


Opening Up Orphan Works, remarks by Paul Courant, Sharon Farb, and Jonathan Band at the 159th ARL membership meeting. Convened by Betsy Wilson. Okay, good morning everyone. Welcome to Opening Up Orphan Works. My name is Betsy Wilson and I stand before you as Chair of the Fair Use and Related Exemptions Working Group and also the Dean of the University of Washington Libraries, and we like to say that's in the right Washington. We call this one the other Washington. Today's session will focus on the importance of making Orphan Works easy to discover and to use for deepening our understanding of the world around us, learning, and discovery.  Orphan Works are works that are subject to copyright, but whose copyright owners cannot be identified or contacted. I kind of think of seances, contacting them, the ones that are no longer being able to be contacted. You may have noticed a wee bit of press coverage on Orphan Works in the last few weeks. This morning our three speakers will review some of the issues for libraries engaging in opening up Orphan Works, and we'll have a synthesis or an analysis of the author's guild lawsuit against Hathi Trust and five research libraries. We have been working together as libraries for many years to try to address Orphan Works, and I can think of no finer individuals than those on the stage to discuss the current situation, the implications, and next steps. Our speakers will each take no more than 15 minutes to frame their presentation. We'll have them all together one after another, and then we'll have some time for your questions and comments. Since two of our institutions represented by our panelists are subject of the subject of legal action, I'd like to remind you of what Jim Williams said during the business meeting, and for those of you who are not at the business meeting, listen up. Remember that the discussions today are not privileged, but they are discoverable. So we ask that you refrain from tweeting or blogging the session. Before we begin, I'm just going to give a quick introduction because I know we want to get to our August panel. You'll find a bio on each speaker in your packet, and I trust you have read these. If not, please do so at some point. Each is as distinguished as the next and is recognized for their expertise in Orphan Works. They will be, I'll do a quick introduction in the order of their speaking. Our first speaker will be Paul Courant. Paul has the largest number of titles on the panel. If you read his biography, you will see he is University Librarian, Dean of Libraries, Shapiro Collegiate Professor of Public Policy, Thurnau Professor, Professor of Economics, and Professor of Information at the University of Michigan. You can also throw in a couple of his previous titles, Provost and Executive Vice President. What you will not read in his bio is that he hails from a family of many historic figures, including a saint in the Catholic Church. I'm not saying that Paul is a saint, but he is a fly fisherman extraordinaire. That has nothing to do with Orphan Works, but I had to put it in anyway. Our second speaker is the colorful Sharon Farb. And if you know the meaning of Farb in German, you get that little pun there. If you read her bio, you'll see that she is AUL for collection management and scholarly communications at UCLA. She holds a JD and PhD and her research focus appropriately on policy issues affecting us all, copyright, privacy, and intellectual freedom. What you will not read in her bio is that she thinks the world needs more plaid. And she wears it whenever she can, although she's not wearing any today. In the future, perhaps we'll see those great pants again. Our cleanup speaker in the parlance of the baseball season is Jonathan Band. If you read his bio, you'll learn that he helped shape laws governing intellectual property in the Internet through a combination of legislative and appellate advocacy. After receiving his JD from a notable ARL institution, and that would be Yale, he worked at the DC office of Morrison and Forster for about a decade. In 2005, he established his own firm, which is Lucky for Us. What you will not find in his official bio is that he is something of an orphan works rock star, and he is seen as a saint in the ARL public policy community. So with no further ado, I invite Paul Courant to the podium to get us rolling. Thank you all for being here. I have to say, I hadn't thought about bringing Cousin Edith the Saint in, which might actually be helpful. And one of the nice things about being introduced by somebody from the University of Washington is that fly fishing and saintliness sort of go together in that part of the world. In fact, the famous River Runs Through It, McLean's book, starts the opening lines about there wasn't much difference between religion and fly fishing in my family, and that's an amenable notion. So the original version of this talk was I was going to do a little cheerleading and preaching about how important orphan works are, and mostly tell you all things that you already know, describe in some detail what we're doing in Michigan, why it's so cool, and invite you all to join us. And things have changed slightly. It feels disingenuous to invite you all to join us in the particulars of becoming defendants in lawsuits. But there are actually things that you can do to help, and we'll get to the end. So I'm mostly actually going to stick to the old script. This isn't about the lawsuit. This is about why it's important to do something about orphan works. And the lawsuit is an unnecessary, misguided, and painful distraction. So here's a piece that was in the old talk, and I'm actually going to now mostly go to the old talk, that's still true. No one in his or her right mind should object to this project. No baby seals were harmed in the making of this movie. And if one can imagine living in a world in which publishers and scholars and readers were all interested in getting works in front of the eyeballs of people who were interested in those works, and in providing a reasonable living to content producers, I'm actually for that, right? Part of my day job has been being a content. So just imagine this world. Publishers and authors want things to get produced in red and earn a decent living. Research libraries want to make the works available to enhance teaching and research and actually more because we have this odd belief that knowing things about the world and knowing things about the human mind are good. We really do believe that. There are many works, some many. First thing, question with copyright not attached, so-called orphan works. W log is a phrase from proving theorems. Without loss of generality, we'll call them orphan works. You can call them something else if you want. And how would a reasonable world approach this set of issues? Well, there's been, as we all know, tons of orphan work task force stuff, which has sketched out a quasi-reasonable approach. And Sharon will talk a little bit about that later. The Google book settlement, remember that, was actually pretty reasonable in a way. It solved the problem by allowing Google to basically sell access to these works. That, I thought, was a good thing. I would have been happier, and I think that a lot of people would have been happier if the way that settlement had been written, the proceeds from those works would have gone to, I don't know, reduce the federal deficit or support the Association of Research Libraries or some other worthy cause rather than to support various authors, that support in various ways the authors of works that weren't orphan works. Somehow that direct exploitation of orphans seemed a little unseemly to some of us. I think my lawyer thinks it's okay for me to say that. But the notion that we would actually have access to them, right, that one of the great strength, indeed in some ways the greatest strength of the Google settlement was it gave us the ability to use essentially everything, including orphans and various mixed status critters, right, where we actually know the publisher and we know the author and we still don't know who has rights, right? That might even be a bigger group than the orphan works and negotiating deals to make those works findable by onesies and twosies is gonna take a lot of time. So we liked, oops, did I, no, I didn't do anything, that's good. So we liked in this regard the Google settlement. So it went away, it's not gonna happen. There were other things about Google settlement we might not have liked and you don't have to have liked the Google settlement to continue to listen to me if you're still listening. It's okay. Although I have to say I remember when the Google settlement first came out I remember writing a blog post which was entitled on being in bed with Google and the closing lines of it were the reason for being in bed with Google is that the alternative is to sleep alone and actually I think that there was more to that than I knew at the time. So we don't have that. So we asked the question, we at Michigan, we had a number of other libraries. So what can we do? And we decided that we should work with publishers and authors to develop a process that would do a good job of identifying orphan works and enable the use of them in a limited way that didn't commute with any commercial uses. No one harmed, right? The principle that comes in economics of Pareto improving trade is one in which everybody is at least as well off as they were when they started and that was the form in which we had in mind for this project and still do. So we made some awful, unpleasant mistakes. We posted 30 odd books which stirred up lots of people looking at them which showed our mistakes. Some of those books shouldn't have been on the list. And now we are somewhat chastened by how difficult it is to identify orphan works. That's actually an interesting useful message. Again, Sharon will talk more about that. And we invited publishers and an association of authors. Oh, what's their name? The author's guild, that's right, to a meeting. And the author's guild chose to sue us rather than come to the meeting. But you could imagine a process in which what we're trying to do is open up pieces where you can open them up without anybody being hurt either in terms of commercial rights or moral rights. Indeed, that's the process that I think follows from the just supposed logic. Okay, some quick slides with numbers and pie charts to make it look like we know what we're doing here. Come on, come on. No, that's not happening. All right. Try pushing this button. Yes. So these are very familiar looking kinds of figures. We're finding in the Hottie Trust pretty stably about 27% of the stuff is in the public domain, so there's a lot of that isn't. And obviously much of that is, I mean, that's all copyright protected. And so we obviously are much restricted in the way that we can use it. It's quite typical of things that people find in lots of libraries. And then this sort of breaks out the public domain content into its various pieces. This is all work that comes out of the copyright, the research management system, which has been funded by IMLS, and lots of us have been involved in. And we've actually looked carefully at like 100,000 works. This is, these are slides from a paper of John Wilkins that you should go look at in which John reaches the conclusion that there are lots and lots and lots of orphan works. I'm not so sure. The title of the paper is Bibliographic Indeterminacy. And what I do believe is that there are lots and lots and lots of works that are bibliographically indeterminate in the sense of knowing who you would go make a deal with to get rights to use these works. I have to toss out here, of course, the publishers and authors are also struggle as much with rights clearance issues as we do. And if you could move towards a process by which we were getting towards a registry of works and who held them, would that be cool or what? That would be useful for everybody. And that was also something we had in mind. This is, again, another slide from John. And the important piece here is on the left in the clump, 1923 to 63, which is where the copyright review management system has been working. And there we really do find a remarkable number, about half, of the works that are a little bit less than half of the works that are 23 to 63 in the U.S. are not in copyright. Things didn't get renewed. And this is a rich sample now. We have over 100,000 looks, and we have had fewer than a dozen cases where people have said, oh, no, actually, this work isn't copyright. So that error rate, a dozen per 100,000, is too good. Surely there are others out there that we've misclassified.  You have a higher error rate than that. But still, the implication is that this process is working quite well and it has enabled us and our libraries to open up now well over 100,000 works that turn out to be a public domain even though if you just did the quickest cut, you wouldn't think they were. And this is now John's pure guess as he calls them in which he thinks there are lots and lots of orphans. And actually, I think, as I said, there are lots and lots of indeterminacies. So let me jump to what our plan was and still is. Identify plausible orphans, which turns out to be harder than easy. I think I guess harder than I thought. Work with possible rights holders to assure a good process. Work towards the beginnings, the inklings of a registry. This should be easy, but as we know, life is full of surprises. Create a pretty good list. Publish it, flog it, sell it, post it on billboards, put it up on the web. And here I have to say, uncharacteristically, since I'm not a saint, I feel pure as the driven snow. So part of our process all along was to put the works up on a list for 90 days and let people find if there was a claim out there. And because we used that process, actually, no works have been released to anybody as a result of the Orphan Works project. No works at all yet, but certainly no works because they weren't orphans. And I think that using the world to help verify that you've done things right is really sensible and indeed an important tradition in scholarship. We publish things in peer-reviewed journals and then people read them and they say, no, no, no, that coefficient isn't 2.03, it's 2.04, you moron, and here's why. And that's actually good that that kind of information goes out there. I got about three minutes? Yeah. Two? All right. Oh, that's very sweet of you. Thank you. See, this is because I'm a fisherman. She gives me the extra minute. And then the last, the important piece here is the way in which we intend to make these works available also doesn't harm anybody. So we have books in the library and the plan was, the plan is, people who are authorized users of the University Library where this book is because we bought the book from some, I don't know, author or somebody and kept it in the library. We have these books in the library and if you are an authorized user of the library, you can go look instead from your breakfast nook with your laptop at the digitized copy of the same book and actually we were going to be really careful if we have one copy that we bought, right? Only one is going to be allowed to be read digitally at the same time. So no sales are lost, right? And actually if reading the content is the thing that people, authors sadly have to give up or happily have to give up when they sell a book to a library, there's no effect on moral rights either. The content could be read, still can. So it's only really an issue if you think there's something really important about reading the content from paper because there are going to be no extra readers as a result of this project and I will just recapitulate for a second. It's important to do this because our mission is to find out how best and to create the best ways of getting works to the relevant audiences, especially scholarly ones but other ones as well. By doing this kind of work we can learn a lot more about bibliographic indeterminacy which is really important. Of course we should be doing this work in conjunction with people who are or might be rights holders because in the end we're going to have to figure out how to reconfigure the cluster of rights out there that's in digital work so we can take maximum advantage of this marvelous digital world that we live in and these great numbers of scans that we have and that is what we're up to and I think in the same sense that fly fishing is God's work, it's God's work. Thank you. Good morning. It's truly a pleasure to be here this morning and let me just start by saying it is an honor for me to share the stage with two leaders in our community that I admire, Paul Courant and Jonathan Band. My topic this morning is due diligence and undue diligence. Due diligence is a legal standard and principle that underpins and underlies many aspects of the law but in particular is central to our understanding of orphan works. It's particularly important in the absence of any U.S. statute or legislation and so what I'm going to do today is go through the principles and the legal standards of due diligence. Betsy already went through this and I think this is not news to anyone but I just want to start with the definition of what an orphan work is. This comes from the U.S. Copyright Office but it's also pretty much the standard definition and as you can see we're looking to both identify and locate copyright owners in order to seek permission. Currently as I said there is no U.S. statute or legislation but I think we can all imagine what it would look like or likely look like if we look at the 2008 Sean Bentley Orphan Work Act which was passed in the Senate. This act has a couple of attributes that are in every single orphan work act that does exist both in the EU and for our Canadian friends and colleagues in Canada as well. The elements of all the orphan work legislation, statutes and frameworks that exist all require a diligent effort to locate the copyright owner that's both reasonable and appropriate under the circumstances and I'm going to go through with the legal definitions of both reasonable, appropriate and the due diligence are. All the statutes require and all of the activities are always going to require record keeping to reflect what we've been doing and the Sean Bentley Act as well as the other frameworks do all include an explicit mention of best practices and so I want to say now and I'll say it again at the end that the Mellon funded American University ARL code of best practices is going to be critical to us along with the other ones. This is what the statutes will look to, this is what the courts will look to and this is what the work is that we need to do and that is already undertaken. The Bentley Act also went on to explicitly include some limitations on liability that are really critical to our community and it's important to note not all uses are the same, not all users are the same. The Bentley Act along with others clearly distinguishes between commercial use and non-commercial use. It's important to note for us and remind ourselves we in general, our uses are about our mission as Paul said, our uses in general if not exclusively are non-commercial educational uses. The Bentley Act, others, the EU framework, the Canadian framework makes a clear distinction between uses and users for commercial purposes and users and uses that are primarily educational, religious and charitable. There are many of you in this room that actually can be more than one of these, can fit into every one of these categories and in some ways you might get to that godliness and saint-like type of use. The other thing that the law requires and every one of these statutes require is that there is and we all do this already some type of invitation for the rights-holders or the owners or the alleged rights-owners or holders of these rights to come forth and tell us and when they do we will always and the law has required that we will investigate and we will take it off of a public view. Paul went through this and I just want to kind of do a little bit more about what the challenge is about orphans, what the scope of the orphan challenge may be. It's interesting to note, this is a quote actually and I have quotes around it from the Copyright Office in 2006 where they stated the orphan works problem is real. They couldn't quantify it in 2006 except for the fact that they did receive over 700 written comments, they had a number of meetings in different parts of the country, all kinds of folks showed up including thank goodness those of us from the Library Archive Museum community talking about how central this was to us and how important it is to our mission, but in 2006 they couldn't quantify for us how big of a problem it was, they just knew it was a problem. So thanks to John Wilkin and some other folks now there's some numbers that we're throwing out and the numbers are significant. So 50% of the volume is in the haughty trust. I mean give or take a little indeterminacy, that's still going to be a big number. Duke Center for the Public Domain says majority of the record of the 20th century. Michael Karn says almost 600,000 published books and you could read the rest, but it is a significant issue and the Copyright Office was right and we all know the problem is real. This is a list of some of the types of material and types of collections that we all hold that can be orphaned. How many of these areas in contrast in some ways to publish books represent research libraries and academic libraries most unique content? Okay and if you go back for one moment to this slide about the scope and the challenge of the problem then think about this, think about every one of these as a potential lost opportunity for use in teaching or research and in aggregate it does represent a locking down of knowledge. Which brings me to where I always like to actually start which is about our mission and I think Paul went over this really well. I think the standard kind of quote about what the mission is of higher ed would be teaching research and in the case of my institution which is public service, I want to call out though that stewardship and dissemination of knowledge in the scholarly record is critical to meeting those mission critical objectives. I love this quote from Robert D. Lee because it emphasizes the importance of access and use in ensuring that the mission is achieved. That's clearly why we all care about the orphans. You're going to hear me say a couple of times context is critical to our understanding, discussion and ability to make use of the orphan works. I also just want to note and remind everyone in this room that courts and cases have found making available entire work, copies of entire work is permitted under, as you can see, a long list of available statutes, exceptions, et cetera, face to face teaching, services for the visually disabled, fair use, the library and archive exception, et cetera, et cetera. I also just want to take one moment and highlight a case that I think is really important because again, this is a situation where for those of you that may not know Bill Graham archives case is one where a commercial coffee table book was made from the art that was used for rock concerts in 60s, 70s and 80s and I'm sure many people in this room all attended and appreciate. Some really creative visual work that in some ways gets the most copyright protection that some of us are really concerned about when people ask us, make copies of all these images in our collection, but here's a case that took copies of entire work, put it in a book, but highly recontextualized it, put it on a timeline, added a lot of other value, added a lot of commentary, added a lot of context, and the court found, even though they did reproduce entire works, visual works, belonged to many folks, that that was a fair use because of the recontextualization that was done. The Library Copyright Alliance did a great brief about recontextualization. Just want to remind folks that there are a number of ways that we can approach making orphan work available. I think it's really important, as Paul said, to keep our eyes on the prize because it's all about the mission and we really need to frame when we're thinking about orphans, thinking about the use that we need to provide to our teaching faculty, to the students, to the research community to not give up and to really remind ourselves that this is the frame that we need to use when we're looking at these kinds of issues. Okay, due diligence. Here's the definition. And what you see in what I'm highlighting here is about the reasonable and prudent person under the circumstances. Again, this is a context-sensitive, fact-dependent determination. This is not a bright-line rule. There's not one rule that applies to all the kind of situations you face and that we face. You've got to look at it in context. It's not a one-size-fits-all. Sorry, there's a typo in this. It should say differs across sectors because, in part, in the EU and with our own best practices work, there may be, in fact, different diligence that will apply when you're talking about audiovisual work versus published work versus unpublished work. So it's not one-size-fits-all. It does involve a duty of proper care and, in my view, it is all about stewardship. Just to give you a teeny sense on the long-tail history of reasonableness in terms of the law, in my view, it starts with Aristotle. Aristotle was concerned about what the moral virtue of a person was. It had to require a mean. It wasn't a person of extremes. A judge learned hand developed a formula. So B is burden for those of you that don't know the learned hand formula. B is for burden. P is probability. And the L is injury. I don't know why I didn't use an I. And what that means for those of you that can't just do the math right there is that the reasonable person analyzes the costs and benefits of her actions and does not act in such a way as to impose costs that are not justified by their benefits. Okay, let's learn it hand. Justice Holmes is probably the justice most known for his articulation of the reasonable person's standard. And you can see the definition here. But again, it's not about the fringe. It's not about the extremes. It is about what is reasonable under the circumstances. Circumstances may change. And I also love this quote from Holmes that the law does not attempt to see men as God sees them. So godliness is not the standard even for Paul. Or especially for Paul. One minute, okay. From the copyright office again, I used the same kind of criteria that I've stressed before. So again, it's dependent. It's fact dependent. It's context dependent. The UCC defines good faith. And this is important because the Bentley Act and all of these frameworks require a good faith use. The UCC says good faith is a relative standard, but they do define bad faith. And this is really important for this audience, I think, because all of you read the UCC on a daily basis. You may not be familiar that there actually is a definition of bad faith. Okay, so bad faith requires dishonest conduct.  But more importantly, the mere failure to make an inquiry will not typically constitute bad faith. A couple of examples in wrapping up. A couple of examples of undue diligence. In my view, this is the exception. This is exceeding. It's beyond what's reasonable is where we focus on the fringe rather than the core. Again, I think the ARL Mellon-funded Code of Best Practices research with folks and the focus groups did find that even folks in our own community sometimes focus on the fringe hypothetical what-ifs that aren't the situation just in front of them. They're overly concerned about any uncertainty or ambiguity. There will always be some. And in my view, that undermines our ability to fulfill our mission. The next steps, again, I think, come from that Mellon-funded ARL report. And so it says that library directors can make the world a better place by engaging together, which also is the theme of this meeting, because it's through collaboration we will gain capacity. And in closing, in the immortal words of Ben Franklin, I do think we need to do this, but not just because we want to avoid legal liability. In fact, that's the least important part of it. But it's because by working together and collaborating together, we will gain capacity and achieve our fundamental mission. Since some people consider, in keeping with the religious theme of this panel, some people consider PowerPoint to be the devil's work, I will avoid that for my presentation. So what I'm going to do is spend the next 15 minutes or so talking about the lawsuit that was filed to just give a quick analysis of some of the legal issues. And I think the only way to describe this lawsuit is that it is very peculiar. And it is peculiar on many levels. And so without kind of getting too legalistic, I'll try to walk through some of the aspects of this lawsuit that are so peculiar. So you have to start at the beginning with the plaintiffs. And there's peculiarities of the plaintiffs. So we talk about the author's guild bringing this copyright infringement action. But the author's guild doesn't own any copyrights. Also some of the other parties involved in the action are an association of Quebecois authors. And there's an association of British authors. And now there's an amended complaint. Some additional parties have joined in. So Australian authors and so forth. But all of these associations that have filed suit they don't own copyrights or they don't own any of the copyrights that issue conceivably in this lawsuit. So that raises a real question of standing. And there is a doctrine that you only can bring a lawsuit if you have standing to bring a lawsuit. And in the copyright area it's very complicated. And the general notion is that it is hard to bring, it's hard for associations to establish standing. And indeed, in the UCLA case that just got dismissed, this is the case of Ambrose Entertainment against UCLA, the trade association that Ambrose is a part of, video distributors, the court actually found that they did not have standing to bring the case. Ambrose had standing but the aim, the association, did not have standing and the court dismissed the complaint as to aim. And so in this case there are some individual plaintiffs that are in the action. They conceivably would have standing, but I'll get to that in a minute. But the associations, the authors' guild, very likely does not have standing to bring the case. Now even with the association, with the individual authors, to the extent that the case deals with orphan works and we'll get to that in a minute, but to the extent that the case deals with the orphan works project that Paul mentioned, those individual authors don't have standing unless their books are among the orphan works. So to the extent that that's what the case is about, they shouldn't have standing either. So in other words there are very serious standing issues of plaintiffs bringing this action. Now let's turn to the defendants. The defendants right now are HathiTrust plus five of the members, five of the universities that are participating in that. Four of the five are state institutions and so would be subject to sovereign immunity. And the fifth Cornell is kind of quasi-public-private and so who knows what their status is. But any event, at least as to the four institutions, the lawsuit should be dismissed and then there's even a question of HathiTrust and what exactly its status is. Perhaps it too would be considered a sovereign entity and the case could not go forward. What's odd about this issue is that it would have been very easy for the lawyers bringing the action to sort of circumvented that problem just by naming the correct plaintiffs and I'm not going to correct defendants, I'm not going to tell them who the correct defendants would have been. But that would have been an easy problem and again even in the UCLA case, the way they got around that they just named everyone they could think of including some people on this panel and the court dismissed the case as to some of the plaintiffs because of sovereign immunity but with respect to some of the defendants with respect to sovereign immunity but not with respect to other defendants. Here for some reason the lawyers did not name all the logical parties that should have been named but named the ones that clearly shouldn't have been named. So again very peculiar. Turning briefly to the substance which in many ways is less legalistic and more perhaps interesting to this group. Again, there's two substantive peculiarities about this case. First, and this is really an important point to stress, the case is not just about orphan works even though that is what we're talking about here and that is what a lot of the press attention has focused on. In fact the complaint is targeted at the Hathi trust as a whole. It really focuses on the infringing activity and the complaints mind begins sort of the minute those files were transmitted from the partner libraries to Hathi trust and sort of copies were made on the Hathi trust servers and then there was a mirror copy made at the University of Indiana. So it is focusing not just on the orphan works but all of the sort of internal copies that Hathi makes. What's again odd about that is that that's been going on for several years and so you would maybe not within the time frame of the statute of limitations but certainly from a latches point of view which is the fact that it's a legal doctrine that cases need to be brought in a timely fashion. I mean Hathi has been operating in a very open fashion for again several years and much of the complaint is focusing on those activities and so again it's sort of peculiar why bring a lawsuit about that broader activity at this point, again peculiarity. And the final peculiarity I want to talk about is certainly from a legal point of view it's clear the legal issue here is fair use. Are these copies whether all these internal copies that Hathi makes when it gets the digital files from the partner libraries and all the server copies that are made in that context the question would be are those copies all fair uses and then to the extent that there's going to be an orphan works project or other projects that Hathi might at some point want to engage in would those be fair use copies? So clearly this is really about fair use. Well the complaint sort of says fair use doesn't apply and it's theory as to why fair use doesn't apply is it says well in the copyright act there's this section 108 which is the exception for libraries but it says section 108 sort of defines the entirety of how copyright law applies to libraries and in fact it is a pervasive regulation of libraries in the copyright act and that libraries cannot do anything beyond what is permitted in section 108. It clearly that's what the complaint clearly says. However section 108 F4 which is part of 108 explicitly says that nothing in this section shall limit the right of fair use for libraries and it does use that term right of fair use not privilege, not exception, not defense, right. It's in the statute. So the section 108 itself says that 108 doesn't limit the applicability of fair use to libraries nonetheless the complaint does take that position. So again it has this peculiarity. Now that's not to say that there aren't serious issues here that reasonable people can disagree about. Certainly there are but again the way this case has entirely been framed in the complaint you know the peculiarities in terms of the plaintiffs the defendants and the substance just really makes it like I said very very peculiar. Thank you. Thank you for listening. Music was provided by Josh Woodward. For more talks from this meeting visit www.arl.org


Time spent in nature heals your body, mind and spirit. Katrina Mayer, Creative Health Institute of Photography.


Occupational physicians play a key role in identifying and treating diseases caused by working conditions. In particular, tropical diseases such as malaria, amoebiasis, and dengue fever are often contracted while traveling for work, making it difficult to prove that these diseases are work-related. This study examined employee case records from 2003 to 2008 in Germany's largest industrial zone, and found that the number of suspected cases of tropical diseases had decreased significantly over the course of the study. Additionally, the majority of suspected cases were accepted as occupational diseases, although few resulted in compensation due to persistent or permanent sequelae. The authors concluded that there is room for improvement in diagnosing and accepting tropical diseases as occupational diseases. This article was authored by Paul J. Jansing, Audrey Morrison, Travis W. Heggie, and others. We are article.tv. Links in the description below.