Aggregator embargoes

[Fred Friend <ucylfjf@ucl.ac.uk>]

Many thanks to contributors to liblicense for bringing into the open this
question of aggregator embargoes. Whatever the rights or wrongs of the
situation, purchasers have a right to know what they will or will not
receive for their money, and most of us have not been aware of these
restrictions agreed between publishers and aggregators. Now at least we
know to ask the question of aggregators before we place an order.

It appears that these embargoes are part of the struggle for
intermediaries - publishers, aggregators, agents and librarians - to
secure a role for themselves in the new environment. My reading of the
situation is that publishers can now perform many of the functions of
other intermediaries and only want to push content through aggregators and
agents (and indeed librarians) when they gain revenue additional to that
revenue they would gain by selling direct. Agents appear to see their role
as aggregators and want to offer the customer as wide a choice of content
as possible. Librarians also want to offer their users as wide a choice of
content as possible, and so perhaps have more sympathy with the
aggregators on this question of embargoes. On the other hand librarians
are also wondering whether they could offer better value for money to
their users by dealing direct with publishers.

Fred Friend
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Frederick J.Friend, 
Director Scholarly Communication,
University College London,
Gower Street,
London WC1E 6BT,
England.
Telephone/Fax  020 7679 4529
Mobile 0774 762 7738    
E-mail       ucylfjf@ucl.ac.uk   or    f.friend@ucl.ac.uk
Web         http://www.ucl.ac.uk/scholarly-communication/
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx