[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)
- To: "'liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu'" <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)
- From: Paul Burry <burry@techbc.ca>
- Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 23:28:37 EDT
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
I maintain that you will not be prevented from enacting the scenario you imagine by any restriction on electronic ILL in a database license. The idea is ludicrous! I still insist that when it comes to the license, the wording of clauses could allow electronic ILL and still make it explicitly clear that this sort of distribution is not permitted. This will still not prevent you from doing it, of course, just as the restrictions as they are currently are do not either. The fact that you do not do so is not a testament to your understanding of the intricacies of some license agreement. Paul Burry Information Services Support Specialist The Portal Technical University of British Columbia burry@techbc.ca (604) 586-6019 -----Original Message----- From: MARGARET LANDESMAN [mailto:mlandesm@library.utah.edu] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 3:59 PM To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: Re: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC) I feel I should admit to being one of those people tempted to distribute documents to thousands of people within seconds. Say there's a really good article on scholarly communications in, say, Nature or the NY Times or the Chronicle of Higher Ed. I have an immediate urge to send it to 'liblicense' and to the Utah Academic Librarians list and to the University of Utah selectors list and to the Pioneer, Utah's Online Library Committee and to the UU Faculty Budget and Planning Committee here which is looking at such issues. And some RPT Committees. And to my scientist brother. And maybe I would ask the UU selectors to forward the article to faculty and grad students in the departments they represent. I bet I could get to thousands in no time at all! Margaret Landesman ____________ Date sent: Mon, 7 May 2001 22:17:05 -0400 (EDT) From: "Heather Morrison" <hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca> To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu> Subject: Re: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC) Send reply to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu 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. 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 ____________ Date sent: Mon, 7 May 2001 22:17:05 -0400 (EDT) From: "Heather Morrison" <hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca> To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu> Subject: Re: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC) Send reply to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu 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. 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 ____________ Date sent: Mon, 7 May 2001 22:17:05 -0400 (EDT) From: "Heather Morrison" <hmorrison@thealbertalibrary.ab.ca> To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu> Subject: Re: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC) Send reply to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu 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. 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
- Prev by Date: RE: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)
- Next by Date: RE: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)
- Prev by thread: RE: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)
- Next by thread: RE: Fair use (RE: electronic journals CCC)
- Index(es):