Fwd: Polk Directories

["Doug Yancey" <dyancey@mail.open.org>]

The editor of ACQNET suggested that LIBLICENSE-L might be an appropriate
forum for this question (forwarded on behalf of my director).  Any
direction or insight is very much appreciated.

Doug Yancey
Salem Public Library
585 Liberty St SE
Salem, OR  97309
503-588-6214

>>> Gail Warner 10/29/2003 4:34:17 PM >>>

Has anyone had problems with the licensing agreement sent out by the
publisher's of Polk's Directories?  Salem's legal department has advised
Library staff that there is unacceptable risk involved in signing the
agreement.  I quote from a recent e-mail sent to SPL concerning the issue:

"The license is limited to the City of Salem employees and does not
include Library patrons.  For other departments this is not a problem
because City employees, such as Building and Safety, use it internally but
do not make it available to the public. The Library is different because
it will be used almost exclusively by patrons.  In order not to violate
the provisions of the license, RL Polk should stipulate in the license
that it is not just limited to City employees but can also be used by
Library patrons.

There is also a provision where they want us to accept liability for third
party claims.  As an example, if someone used the directory to stalk and
commit a crime against another person, the City would agree that RL Polk
could not be held liable and that we would accept their liability. I don't
think these are risks the City should accept in a written licensing
agreement."

SPL staff have been working on this issue since July, and making no
progress with RL Polk, who won't sign an amended agreement, or with our
Legal Department, who won't authorize us to sign an agreement that does
include Legal's amendments.  Any suggestions would be welcome.

Gail Warner, Director
Salem Public Library, Salem, OR
gwarner@mail.open.org