| Previous by Date |
Index by Date
Threaded Index |
Next by Date |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Thread | Next by Thread |
Nondisclosure, continued
To pick up on our pre-Thanksgiving "nondisclosure" thread, two things: 1. None of the sample licenses provided by publishers for the Liblicense Web site (http://www.library.yale.edu/~llicense/publishers.shtml) includes a non-disclosure clause. That's one of numerous reasons these licenses are reproduced ... they are user- and library-friendly in a number of important ways. Publishers such as Academic, Chadwyck-Healey, JSTOR, and a number of others do not require the terms of the contract to be kept confidential. They are happy to make available the normal terms under which they do business with library customers. 2. Which leads to a second matter: Bernie Sloan and Peter Graham both asked that we hear on this list from electronic information suppliers on this matter. Why do some insist on non-disclosure of any/all terms of an electronic content license, while others treat the terms as ones that should be disclosed? Can we hear from some of the publishers and vendors on this list, from both the disclosure and non-disclosure camps, so we library-consumers can understand this topic better? Are there some kinds of information about a content license that should in fact be kept confidential? Are some kinds of *publications* more in need of non-disclosure clauses than others? Some kinds of *contracts* (i.e., consortial?) Would those of you who require non-disclosure be satisfied if only price were not disclosed? Is non-disclosure appropriate for educational customers or should it apply only to commercial-to-commercial arrangements? Thank you, dear readers, for whatever light you can shed on this matter. Ann Okerson Associate University Librarian/Collections Ann.Okerson@yale.edu
|
http://www.library.yale.edu/liblicense © 1996, 1997 Yale University Library |
Please read our Disclaimer E-mail us with feedback |
|