RE: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)

[Paul Burry <burry@techbc.ca>]

I maintain that you will not be prevented from enacting the scenario you
imagine by any restriction on electronic ILL in a database license.  The
idea is ludicrous!  I still insist that when it comes to the license, the
wording of clauses could allow electronic ILL and still make it explicitly
clear that this sort of distribution is not permitted.  This will still
not prevent you from doing it, of course, just as the restrictions as they
are currently are do not either.  The fact that you do not do so is not a
testament to your understanding of the intricacies of some license
agreement.

Paul Burry
Information Services Support Specialist
The Portal
Technical University of British Columbia
burry@techbc.ca
(604) 586-6019


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	MARGARET LANDESMAN [mailto:mlandesm@library.utah.edu] 
Sent:	Tuesday, May 08, 2001 3:59 PM
To:	liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject:	Re: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)

I feel I should admit to being one of those people tempted to distribute
documents to thousands of people within seconds.  Say there's a really
good article on scholarly communications in, say, Nature or the NY Times
or the Chronicle of Higher Ed. I have an immediate urge to send it to
'liblicense' and to the Utah Academic Librarians list and to the
University of Utah selectors list and to the Pioneer, Utah's Online
Library Committee and to the UU Faculty Budget and Planning Committee here
which is looking at such issues.  And some RPT Committees.  And to my
scientist brother.  And maybe I would ask the UU selectors to forward the
article to faculty and grad students in the departments they represent.

I bet I could get to thousands in no time at all! 
Margaret Landesman

____________

Date sent:      	Mon, 7 May 2001 22:17:05 -0400 (EDT)
From:           	"Heather Morrison"
<hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca>
To:             	<liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Subject:        	Re: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)
Send reply to:  	liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu

I think Paul makes a good point here, that the so-called threat of
distributing documents to thousands of people within seconds is an
irrational fear.  While this is technically possible, in reality doing
this would likely result in the sender receiving thousands of complaints.
Unless, of course, they take the time to develop distribution lists of
people likely to be interested in particular topics.  This would be so
labour-intensive that libraries would insist on going back to paper
distribution of interlibrary loans for their own protection!

Some of these fears seem to have arisen from Napster.  In academia,
publishers could wait to start worrying until the average academic
discipline attains the popularity of rock music.  The experiences of many
a public library may be instructive here:  the rock music often needs to
be kept behind the desk for security reasons, but classical music is
perfectly safe to leave out for the public to browse.

In the meantime, developing models for selling products that encourage
payment rather than infringement would make everyone's life easier.  As
Edward pointed out, there is room for publishers to provide commercial
document delivery that would be more attractive than interlibrary loans.
A win-win for everyone, as libraries could find more effective means
of using their funds than paying for the staff-intensive interlibrary
loans process - like buying more from the publishers!  On another listserv
recently, the idea of "micropayments" was tossed about.  As soon as
publishers make it more cost-effective to take advantage of commercial
services for individual articles than to use interlibrary loan, libraries
(and others) will make good use of these services.

Also, publishers who work towards pricing models that allow for all types
and sizes of libraries to subscribe within their budgets, will find the
need for interlibrary loan decreasing.

Heather Morrison
Knowledge Network Project Coordinator
The Alberta Library
Rm 6-14, 7 Sir Winston Churchill Sqr
Edmonton, AB T5J 2V5
Tel: (780) 414-0805 Fax: (780) 414-0806
Email: hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca

____________

Date sent:      	Mon, 7 May 2001 22:17:05 -0400 (EDT)
From:           	"Heather Morrison"
<hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca>
To:             	<liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Subject:        	Re: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)
Send reply to:  	liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu

I think Paul makes a good point here, that the so-called threat of
distributing documents to thousands of people within seconds is an
irrational fear.  While this is technically possible, in reality doing
this would likely result in the sender receiving thousands of complaints.
Unless, of course, they take the time to develop distribution lists of
people likely to be interested in particular topics.  This would be so
labour-intensive that libraries would insist on going back to paper
distribution of interlibrary loans for their own protection!

Some of these fears seem to have arisen from Napster.  In academia,
publishers could wait to start worrying until the average academic
discipline attains the popularity of rock music.  The experiences of many
a public library may be instructive here:  the rock music often needs to
be kept behind the desk for security reasons, but classical music is
perfectly safe to leave out for the public to browse.

In the meantime, developing models for selling products that encourage
payment rather than infringement would make everyone's life easier.  As
Edward pointed out, there is room for publishers to provide commercial
document delivery that would be more attractive than interlibrary loans.
A win-win for everyone, as libraries could find more effective means
of using their funds than paying for the staff-intensive interlibrary
loans process - like buying more from the publishers!  On another listserv
recently, the idea of "micropayments" was tossed about.  As soon as
publishers make it more cost-effective to take advantage of commercial
services for individual articles than to use interlibrary loan, libraries
(and others) will make good use of these services.

Also, publishers who work towards pricing models that allow for all types
and sizes of libraries to subscribe within their budgets, will find the
need for interlibrary loan decreasing.

Heather Morrison
Knowledge Network Project Coordinator
The Alberta Library
Rm 6-14, 7 Sir Winston Churchill Sqr
Edmonton, AB T5J 2V5
Tel: (780) 414-0805 Fax: (780) 414-0806
Email: hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca

____________

Date sent:      	Mon, 7 May 2001 22:17:05 -0400 (EDT)
From:           	"Heather Morrison"
<hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca>
To:             	<liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Subject:        	Re: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)
Send reply to:  	liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu

I think Paul makes a good point here, that the so-called threat of
distributing documents to thousands of people within seconds is an
irrational fear.  While this is technically possible, in reality doing
this would likely result in the sender receiving thousands of complaints.
Unless, of course, they take the time to develop distribution lists of
people likely to be interested in particular topics.  This would be so
labour-intensive that libraries would insist on going back to paper
distribution of interlibrary loans for their own protection!

Some of these fears seem to have arisen from Napster.  In academia,
publishers could wait to start worrying until the average academic
discipline attains the popularity of rock music.  The experiences of many
a public library may be instructive here:  the rock music often needs to
be kept behind the desk for security reasons, but classical music is
perfectly safe to leave out for the public to browse.

In the meantime, developing models for selling products that encourage
payment rather than infringement would make everyone's life easier.  As
Edward pointed out, there is room for publishers to provide commercial
document delivery that would be more attractive than interlibrary loans.
A win-win for everyone, as libraries could find more effective means
of using their funds than paying for the staff-intensive interlibrary
loans process - like buying more from the publishers!  On another listserv
recently, the idea of "micropayments" was tossed about.  As soon as
publishers make it more cost-effective to take advantage of commercial
services for individual articles than to use interlibrary loan, libraries
(and others) will make good use of these services.

Also, publishers who work towards pricing models that allow for all types
and sizes of libraries to subscribe within their budgets, will find the
need for interlibrary loan decreasing.

Heather Morrison
Knowledge Network Project Coordinator
The Alberta Library
Rm 6-14, 7 Sir Winston Churchill Sqr
Edmonton, AB T5J 2V5
Tel: (780) 414-0805 Fax: (780) 414-0806
Email: hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca