Licence to fufil

It is simply not true to say that "authors are missing out on a fortune" (News, THES, May 19). In the financial year just ended, the Copyright Licensing Agency collected Pounds 24 million in copyright fees and distributed Pounds 23 million (unaudited figure). Of the Pounds 20 million distributed in the United Kingdom, Pounds 7.5 million went to authors and Pounds 12.5 million to publishers, which reflects a mutually agreed split.

Of the Pounds 4.9 million collected in higher education, Pounds 1.1 million was paid to overseas rights-holders, Pounds 2.4 million to UK publishers and Pounds 1.4 million to UK authors. The figures relate to fees collected for photocopying in UK institutions. This is not the same as fees due to UK authors. CLA also receives payments from collecting societies in other countries, which are then distributed to British rights-holders, including academics.

The Pounds 180,000 in the article comes from the Authors' Licensing and Collecting Society and relates to the fees due to UK authors of journal articles only. To quote this figure in the same paragraph as the total figure of Pounds 5 million creates a false impression.

As part of the blanket licence in higher education, surveys are conducted according to a methodology agreed with the Committee of Vice-chancellors and Principals. These enable fees to be fairly apportioned to individual authors. The licence exists because authors and publishers in the UK trust the higher education sector to give a full and fair account of its copying. Anything less undermines an arrangement that makes it easy to copy widely legally and at reasonable cost.

The licence balances the interests of copyright-holders, both academic and non-academic, and those of higher education users. The CLA and the CVCP have agreed that the licence will act as the foundation for its successor.

Peter Shepherd. Chief executive. Copyright Licensing Agency.