Re: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)

["Heather Morrison" <hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca>]

=09charset=3D"iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-edited-by: aokerson@pantheon.yale.edu
Date: Mon,  7 May 2001 22:15:47 EDT
Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.2 -- ListProc(tm) by CREN
Precedence: bulk

I think Paul makes a good point here, that the so-called threat of
distributing documents to thousands of people within seconds is an
irrational fear.  While this is technically possible, in reality doing
this would likely result in the sender receiving thousands of complaints.
Unless, of course, they take the time to develop distribution lists of
people likely to be interested in particular topics.  This would be so
labour-intensive that libraries would insist on going back to paper
distribution of interlibrary loans for their own protection!

Some of these fears seem to have arisen from Napster.  In academia,
publishers could wait to start worrying until the average academic
discipline attains the popularity of rock music.  The experiences of many
a public library may be instructive here:  the rock music often needs to
be kept behind the desk for security reasons, but classical music is
perfectly safe to leave out for the public to browse.

In the meantime, developing models for selling products that encourage
payment rather than infringement would make everyone's life easier.  As
Edward pointed out, there is room for publishers to provide commercial
document delivery that would be more attractive than interlibrary loans. =
=20
A win-win for everyone, as libraries could find more effective means of
using their funds than paying for the staff-intensive interlibrary loans
process - like buying more from the publishers!  On another listserv
recently, the idea of "micropayments" was tossed about.  As soon as
publishers make it more cost-effective to take advantage of commercial
services for individual articles than to use interlibrary loan, libraries
(and others) will make good use of these services.

Also, publishers who work towards pricing models that allow for all types
and sizes of libraries to subscribe within their budgets, will find the
need for interlibrary loan decreasing.

Heather Morrison
Knowledge Network Project Coordinator
The Alberta Library
Rm 6-14, 7 Sir Winston Churchill Sqr
Edmonton, AB T5J 2V5
Tel: (780) 414-0805 Fax: (780) 414-0806
Email: hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca


----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Burry" <burry@techbc.ca>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>; "T. Scott Plutchak"
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2001 4:32 PM
Subject: RE: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)


Trouble is, license restrictions on electronic ILL prevent nothing except
ILL, since anyone determined to distribute an article to "several thousand
people within seconds" (who's doing this anyway?) is not likely to be
discouraged by a license agreenment.  Maybe if the license said
"electronic ILL is okay as long as you ILL librarians don't email anything
to several thousand people," then the publishers would go for it!  It's
time for the publishing world to stop hiding behind their fa=E7ade of
irrational fear. Show me data to support the assertion that allowing
electronic distribution would result in the kind of scenario you describe.

Poor old mega corporations and their billions in lost revenue, how will
Elsevier ever survive?  Cry me a river. . .

Paul Burry
Information Services Support Specialist
The Portal
Technical University of British Columbia
burry@techbc.ca
(604) 586-6019