[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Confidentiality language and the netLibrary license
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: Confidentiality language and the netLibrary license
- From: "Marilyn Geller" <marilyn.geller@configuredinfo.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:39:41 EST
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Rick, I've been giving this topic a bit of thought lately because I truly think it may provide a way of making progress all around. It's important up front for me to state that I do not represent any parties or sides in this discussion. To begin with, public institutions such as public libraries or libraries associated with public universities may be required by law to delete the confidentiality clause or, barring that, to modify it with the qualifier, "to the extent possible". You obviously know whether this is applicable in your case. But I think this loophole for libraries misses the point. The only value that this kind of confidentiality clause has for libraries is 1) to avoid embarrassment if you've made a very bad deal and don't want to fess up or 2) to preserve a very good deal that will only be good as long as you keep quiet about it. For publishers and service providers, on the other hand, it allows them free reign to make the best business deal they can without having to worry about whether the last "bad" deal they made will haunt them. I'm not convinced that it's such a great deal for publishers and service providers either even though it seems to be their preference. The practice of inserting the confidentiality clause allows us all to avoid the hard work of deciding what these service are really worth, putting a firm price tag on them and buying them off the shelf. A few years ago, one could make the case that we didn't know enough about what the services even include, much less what they're worth. These days, if we don't know, it is simply because we haven't bothered to figure it out. And we can afford not to bother to figure it out if everyone stays quiet about it. I would suggest that a groundswell of libraries balking at the confidentiality clause will help all of us bring more routinization to the process of purchasing electronic resource services. I think you are absolutely on the right track in trying to encourage a united front, and I think it will benefit all parties! Marilyn Geller, MSLS Information Management Consultant 436 School Street Belmont, MA 02478-3864 Email: marilyn.geller@configuredinfo.com Fax: 617-484-2629 Phone: 617-484-7379
- Prev by Date: RE: Confidentiality language and the netLibrary license
- Next by Date: IP access for Evidence-Based Nursing is now resolved
- Previous by thread: RE: Confidentiality language and the netLibrary license
- Next by thread: Re: Confidentiality language and the netLibrary license
- Index(es):