[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A question of licences and Alumni members
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>, <ann.okerson@yale.edu>
- Subject: Re: A question of licences and Alumni members
- From: "Michael Spinella" <mspinell@aaas.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 20:20:38 EDT
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Ann et al, I tend to agree with John's and others' concern that it would be difficult to authenticate users that may be scattered all over the globe. Responding to your first point, yes, I think it's likely that negotiating for alumni access would raise prices. It would also very likely raise costs, both the publishers' and the library's, because the negotiations - already arguably too protracted - would now be complicated further, and because libraries would have to implement a technical regimen to authenticate this new set of remote users (at least my impression is that most don't have this capability right now - am I wrong?). And to your second point, I guess I'd need to know more specifics. In a sense, if the continuing ed courses could honestly be construed to be under the UNIVERSITY's auspices (as opposed to just the Alumni Association's), then maybe nothing further need be negotiated, since this particular subset of all alumni are really now just reverting to students, and therefore are already authorized users, it would seem. On the other hand, I would be leery of having such programs cooked up by the Alumni Association, and then 'dressed up' to look like courses from the University. Of course, that would be inappropriate, and maybe the right answer there would simply be to tell the AA to approach the publisher as a separate entity and try to negotiate their own deal... I also wonder if buying information resources for alumni would be the best use of institutional financial resources, even if publishers wanted to work out the pricing and logistical complications. I realize it's up to the librarians and their institutions to decide how to spend their budgets, but it does seem clear that this would result in significantly higher costs and could raise a legitimate question about the institutional mission and focus. We almost seem to be trying to figure out a way for the university to relieve their alumni (or worse yet, their alumni's future employers) of sharing in the costs of information! Hmmmm. Maybe viewed this way, it's not such a hot idea. It is not at all clear to me why a university would seek this benefit for its alumni, or why alumni should expect it? Is it expected to be a tool for developing alumni donations? or a benefit to be used in 'marketing' the school to prospects ("Come to Yale, and get Mad magazine online for life!!" --Yeah, come to think of it, that might work...). Of course, I'm being facetious, but is there really a compelling mission angle on this that I am missing? More seriously, I am also considering this not so much as a publisher, but as an alumnus, and as a parent not too long away from having to fund my kids' educations! I really don't expect my own alma mater to take care of my info needs for life! Do others? Should they? Whew, isn't it already expensive enough to go to college, without having to add in the 'info for life' fee?!... Mike Spinella __________ >>> ann.okerson@yale.edu 07/16/00 02:21PM >>> John and others: I understand the traditional arguments against including alumni in licenses. And I have two real-life questions: 1. Under what conditions would electronic information providers include alumni access to a given information resources? Under a different license altogether? Under the same license but more money? With certain limitations? 2. What if one's alumni association creates short continuing education courses for those same alumni, at their request (they want to keep in touch with former professors and learn from them, etc.). Assume here that the courses are offered for free or at price that aims to recover costs (not make money), and the individuals in the courses can be identified and access given to enrollees only, with the rest of alumni excluded. Would such a scenario be acceptable? Would it require a whole separate license negotiation (which, for, say, a 4 or 6-week course with a limited enrollment of, say, 50 or fewer wouldn't likely be cost effective)? Would inclusion of such alumni be acceptable under fairly common license language that permits faculty, staff, and student access wherever they may be located? I would appreciate a discussion of such limited alumni-as-student coverage and its relationship to all-alumni-all-the-time kinds of licenses. Thank you, Ann Okerson Yale University Library
- Prev by Date: Re: A question of licences and Alumni members
- Next by Date: Re: A question of licences and Alumni members
- Prev by thread: Re: A question of licences and Alumni members
- Next by thread: Re: A question of licences and Alumni members
- Index(es):