[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Sage titles
- To: Carole.J.Richter.8@nd.edu, liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: RE: Sage titles
- From: vivienne.dunlop@sagepub.co.uk
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 19:05:33 EST
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
A couple of quick thoughts: Our site license was devised in 1997 and we have had remarkably little (direct!)feedback on problems with it to date. It's not set in stone - but you've got to start from somewhere ... and that's where we started, not without considerable consultation at the time. Since then, where elements have been a stumbling block for individual library purchasers, we have generally been able to come to agreement on moderated wording - but to date, the stumbling blocks/queries have all differed - so a general site license overhaul hasn't seemed appropriate. However, you raise lots of interesting points here which we will look at in more detail - and I would welcome other comments from list members. I will make responses on general points available to the lists also. Electronic access is currently free of additional subscription charge from Sage to institutional subscribers, through the intermediaries mentioned in my earlier email and on the website. We certainly don't intend this to be mis-leading - we absolutely appreciate that there can be substantial costs through the intermediaries which purchasers have to pay - this was one reason we have been extremely keen to broaden the range of intermediaries hosting the content. Use your intermediaries - they want your business - and ours! We are continuing to look at other intermediaries and direct access also - and will be looking for market feedback on purchasers and end users 'wish-lists' and 'must-haves'. Vivienne Vivienne Dunlop Site Licensing Liaison Contracts & Rights Manager Sage Publications http://www.sagepub.co.uk vivienne.dunlop@sagepub.co.uk -----Original Message----- From: Carole Richter To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Sent: 23/02/00 23:06 Subject: RE: Sage titles Dear Vivienne, Thanks for responding, although I hope I would have sounded a bit more diplomatic had I gone to you directly, as you rightly suggest I should have. Here are my concerns: access to the electronic version is no longer 'free' if access requires a 3rd party platform that includes a substantial fee. OCLC access for our Sage titles would cost at least $8,000 per year, not including access fees for the base package which is also necessary. Ebsco would be free if they were our serials vendor for Sage titles, but they aren't. Rowecom...it's true that we need to investigate what that would entail. Because Faxon is our primary serials vendor, it is possible that Rowecom would be an option for us. But I would most prefer to see either direct access provided by Sage, or as a good alternative, through a service such as Catchword which manages e-journal access efficiently and without additional charge to libraries. We are placed in an awkward position when faculty learn from Sage that they 'should' have free access to electronic versions of their journals, but when the logistics are not in fact free. Licensing issues--I am not the best person to discuss the finer points of licensing agreements, but I'll address a couple of things that seem to me to be of concern: * 1.1 Sentence 1 is fine. Re the statement "In addition, the Licensee shall take reasonable necessary measures to safeguard the intellectual property and proprietary rights of Sage and any others involved in the creation of the Sage Journals Online Material including the property and moral rights of all authors of the Sage Journals Online Material."--I don't recall seeing anthing quite like it before, but I think the wording is so broad and vague that it should be excluded completely. Re "The Licensee shall ensure that the Notes for Authorized Users below are made available to all Authorized Users of the Sage Journals Online Material. All rights in the Sage Journals Online Material which are not specifically granted to the Licensee under this Licence are expressly reserved to Sage." I don't object to this, but we would need to know exactly what you expect here. Can you post this clearly at the title level for each journal? If not, is a statement on a 'connect page' enough? 1.2 Re "Physical visitors using public access terminals within the Library at the Site, who must be made aware of the obligations of Authorized Users shown below..."Again, is a connect page with the information posted adequate awareness? 1.3 and 1.4 RE "The Licensee may not otherwise store or permit Authorized Users to store the Sage Journals Online Material on any medium, transfer, reproduce, modify, publish or otherwise exploit the Sage Journals Online Material except in so far as is reasonable to exercise the rights granted under this Licence. Neither the Licensee nor the Authorized Users may use any part or parts of the Sage Journals Online Material in coursepacks or other collections for teaching purposes..." and also the statement re "Licensee may not engage in any form of competitive activity by delivering to any other institution copies of articles from Sage journals" ---these statements appear to forbid basic fair use ILL activity, although perhaps I am mistaken? It is unclear just how restrictive these phrases are intended to be. We would be much relieved to see somthing indicating that at least print copies of the electronic article could be transmitted under fair use guidelines, and that password authorized access to articles placed on electronic reserve would be permitted. Because electronic access is based on print subscription, it may be that you are assuming these rights are permitted from the print environment and aren't needed in the electronic format. We are moving in the direction of considering not binding or storing print versions of journals we receive in electronic format (at least in some instances), and that would make it difficult to provide these ordinary services from the print copies. Thank you for listening...I look forward to hearing back from you. I do apologize sincerely for not bringing the concerns that I felt to you directly. I could certainly agree that the term abyssmal is overstating the case considerably. Sincerely, Carole (somewhat mortified but still hoping for easier access) Carole Richter
- Prev by Date: Hot off the Press: Elsevier
- Next by Date: RE: Sage titles
- Prev by thread: Re: Sage titles
- Next by thread: RE: Sage titles
- Index(es):