Re: Journal of Immunology

[David Goodman <dgoodman@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>]

A useful wording is that authorized users include "those persons who are
permitted to have access to the University Library." notice the complete
absence of negative words.

David Goodman
Research Librarian and
Biological Sciences Bibliographer
Princeton University Library
dgoodman@princeton.edu            609-258-7785

On Sun, 5 May 2002, John Webb wrote:

> I think you may asume that your university network is secure within this
> definition.  Surely your university network administrator thinks so.
> When you first sit down and turn on or log into your computer at work, you
> are being authenticated in some fashion "consistent with then-current best
> practice and security procedures."  So about the only questions are how
> does the license define "authorized users" and how does the license cover
> the public computers in your library.  It should allow access using the
> Library's public computers by non-affiliated walk-in users of your
> Library. Those computers are also recognized and authenticated by your
> network, even though they don't "belong" to an individual, otherwise they
> wouldn't work. If you don't allow use by walk-in users who aren't
> affiliated, then you have no problem.  The only other issue I can think of
> is wireless.  If you have wireless, I assume your wireless network
> requires authentication.  If it doesn't (which I can't imagine), then
> don't register its IP's, in which case it will be treated as a remote
> site, for which you already require authentication.  I'm at home and don't
> have immediate access to our Journal of Immunonolgy license, but I think
> it fits under all of the above.
>
> John Webb
> jwebb@wsu.edu
>
>
> At 05:09 PM 5/3/02 EDT, you wrote:
> >Has anyone else out there been struggling with the Journal of Immunology
> >license? They have finally consented to indemnity clauses we can stomach,
> >barely. Plus, their general restrictions on scholarly sharing are
> >problematic--of course we can sign and turn a blind eye to what we know
> >our users will do.
> >
> >Beyond indemnity and other issues, one major stumbling block is the
> >publisher's insistence on the phrase "Secure Network" which they define
> >as: A network (whether a standalone network or a virtual network within
> >the Internet), which is only accessible to Authorized Users whose identity
> >is authenticated at the time of login and periodically thereafter
> >consistent with then-current best practice and security procedures.
> >
> >We find this language problematic since the publisher makes no distinction
> >between on-campus and remote access. Of course, we require authentication
> >for all remote users, but not for on-campus users. The publisher feels
> >that no change is required since it follows the Cox model, plus their
> >"copyright" lawyer has signed off on it!
> >
> >I am still new to licensing issues, and although I have received excellent
> >guidance from my colleagues here. I wonder if others have encountered this
> >issue.
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >
> >Daniel Dollar, MLS, AHIP
> >daniel.dollar@yale.edu