[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: license jurisdiction related to pricing
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: license jurisdiction related to pricing
- From: David Goodman <dgoodman@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 22:56:47 EDT
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Ann, this is in my opinion, not a very good idea. Remarkably, and as we all know, it's the first time you ever had a thought on licensing that was even slightly questionable!. The place of jurisdiction is a license provision extremely unlikely to have practical significance. It's of significance in the contract, because its a major nuisance factor. It's become a major nuisance factor because of the legal requirements affecting public institutions in the US, and becaused of their total inability to alter them, as they're generally part of their states' legislation. At an institution not having such problem, I doubt that anyone would care very much about the jurisdiction (speaking personally and only for myself--assume me to be totally ignorant of what my own institution thinks on the matter officially). It is extraordinarily unlikely that we would ever actually be in court about a licensing dispute, or even be threatened with the situation. Assuming we were all to lose our minds and outrageously and officially to violate copyright, or fail to follow up violations, the supplier might cancel the contract, but I can't see our attorneys willing to fight the case. If a supplier were to unreasonably fail to provide material, or not meet a service quality agreement, we would expect to negotiate the appropriate adjustments. If a supplier were to refuse to make them, or be otherwise totally irrespnsible, we wouldn't renew. If the supplier was performing so poorly, I can't see that it would be worth it to seek monetary damages, or practical to attempt to compel specific performance--everyone else would be cancelling also. I think pricing should be on the basis of the service provided, either by material supplied or population served (a totally general statement leaving plenty of room for argument). It should't be based upon the possible occurence of unlikely or irrelevant events, nor should it penalize institutions that must subscribe to legally required terms, or reward publishers who make them do so. David Goodman Research Librarian and Biological Sciences Bibliographer Princeton University Library dgoodman@princeton.edu 609-258-7785 On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Ann Okerson wrote: > The issue of jurisdiction comes up frequently in licensing. Does anyone > have experience with a two-tier pricing model designed to address that > issue? That is, lower price if you agree to jurisdiction of the > publisher's choice, slightly higher if you insist on your own? It might > be a way to find a win-win situation, if the price differential were not > prohibitive. > > Would such a possibility be appealing to librarians and publishers? > > Ann Okerson
- Prev by Date: Re: InfoTrac� College Edition
- Next by Date: RE: InfoTrac� College Edition
- Prev by thread: RE: license jurisdiction related to pricing
- Next by thread: Re: license jurisdiction related to pricing
- Index(es):