Frequently Asked Questions

How do I view and download PDF files from the repository?

Web browsers may have different configurations for handling PDF files, but in general, you should be presented with the option of either viewing or downloading the PDF file, or with the option of doing both. All PDF files in the repository have been put through the process of optical character recognition (or OCR), which means you will be able to conduct a basic exact-match word search within the file.

{ top }

Is there a fee associated with viewing any documents on the repository?

No, there is no fee associated with viewing documents on the repository. The repsoitory is a service of the Kathrine R. Everett Law Library and is a free and open access repository. You can learn more about the repository by visiting our About page.

{ top }

Can I post documents to the repository?

At this time, the repository is only capable of being updated or added to by law library staff. While many bepress law repositories allow faculty members or student journal editors to manage works in the repository, we do not yet have the capability to extend such an option to the Carolina Law community.

{ top }

How do I suggest materials for inclusion in the repository?

To suggest materials for inclusion in the repository, please contact the repository manager or Julie Kimbrough, the law library's deputy director.

{ top }

What should I do if I find an error in the repository?

If you find an error in the repository, please tell us! In reporting the error, please send an email to the repository manager with as much detail as possible about the error, including a link to the page containing the error, if possible. We will do our best to have the error checked and corrected within two business days.

{ top }

Access & Removal Policy

About This Policy

A person or entity may request the removal of electronic documents from the Carolina Law Scholarship Repository (CLSR). In support of the mission of the Kathrine R. Everett Law Library, the CLSR seeks to provide as broad access as possible to the materials we hold while maintaining our legal and ethical obligations. If a work is removed, a bibliographic citation of the work may remain in the Carolina Law Scholarship Repository with a note regarding the removal.

{ top }

Examples of Removal Requests

In reference to the policy stated above:

  • An author or co-author of an electronic document who can demonstrate authorship or co-authorship of the document may request removal of that document.
  • A copyright holder who can demonstrate copyright ownership of an electronic document may request removal of that document.
  • In the case of student work leading to a degree, such as an electronic version of a thesis, dissertation, or other paper, the proper academic department personnel may request removal of an electronic document in cases of academic irregularities.

{ top }

A Request for Removal Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act

If you believe your copyright of materials posted to Scholarly Commons has been infringed, please send notice to our designated agent for notices of infringement and provide the following information.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act specifies that all infringement claims must be in writing (either electronic mail or paper letter) and must include the following elements, per 17 U.S.C. § 512(g)(3):

  • a physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed;
  • identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed;
  • identification of the infringed material;
  • information reasonably sufficient to permit the Kathrine R. Everett Law Library of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s School of Law to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number, and if available, an electronic mail address at which the complaining party may be contacted;
  • a statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner or the law; and
  • a statement that the information contained in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner.

{ top }