RE: license jurisdiction related to pricing

["DAVID BICKFORD (FAC)" <dlbickfo@email.uophx.edu>]

I have not seen this model in any official form. I do think, however, that
a modular approach to licensing and pricing might resolve a lot of the
negotiation impasses mentioned on this list.

This idea could be extended beyond the issue of governing law. For
example, pricing differentials could be offered to provide for
interlibrary loan, course packs, and other add-ons above and beyond some
of the more restrictive terms and conditions that have been shared on this
list.

For this to work, the base price would have to perceived as so reasonable
that the subscribing institutions wouldn't mind paying for add-ons. If the
price is already perceived as high, I think most subscribing institutions
would rightly demand that their needs be accomodated as part of the base
price.

An innovative vendor might have an opportunity to set clearly tiered
pricing based on the tradeoff between the licensee's permitted uses and
the licensor's perception of risk. This model presupposes that the
purchasing and /or legal departments that many deal with are willing to
play along. If they aren't, then this model might not be feasible.

David Bickford
University Librarian
University of Phoenix

-----Original Message-----
From: Ann Okerson
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Sent: 6/21/02 8:00 PM
Subject: license jurisdiction related to pricing

The issue of jurisdiction comes up frequently in licensing.  Does anyone
have experience with a two-tier pricing model designed to address that
issue?  That is, lower price if you agree to jurisdiction of the
publisher's choice, slightly higher if you insist on your own?  It might
be a way to find a win-win situation, if the price differential were not
prohibitive.

Would such a possibility be appealing to librarians and publishers?

Ann Okerson
Yale University
ann.okerson@yale.edu