Re: Confidentiality language and the netLibrary license

[Tom Williams <twilliam@bbl.usouthal.edu>]

Colleagues,

In response to Mr. Esposito's message;  Comparing his own personal
mortgage to a license agreement for online is comparing apples and
oranges.  While I surely agree that one's personal information is or
should be subject to legal or ethical limitations, the same is not true
for the licensing of commercial products.  Although, what if your mortgage
company told you that you were not allowed to share your mortgage
information with anyone else, including friends and relatives?  We are
always sharing this sort of information with those we trust or care about
in hopes of finding the best deal or helping them find the best deal.

In the case of these publishers, this is just part of their "divide and
conquer" operating procedure.  The only clout we, as librarians, might
have is if we were to act together.  The publishers are attempting to
remove this right from us to bolster their own ability to establish rules
which benefit them alone.

Let's not accept such terms lest the publishers continue to believe that
all information professionals just fell off the turnip truck.

-- 
Thomas L. Williams, AHIP
Director, Biomedical Libraries 
University of South Alabama
College of Medicine
Mobile, Al 36688-0002
tel. (251)460-6885
fax. (251)460-7638
twilliam@bbl.usouthal.edu

On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Joseph J. Esposito wrote:

> It is, I believe, neither uncommon nor unexpected that someone would not
> want his or her business dealings broadcast to the world.  I would not
> want the details of my mortgage posted on a Web site.  I would have hoped
> that Bentham's Panopticon was a misguided historical fact and not a vision
> for the new world.  The real tragedy is that confidentiality must be
> enforced by contract rather than being a working, operating assumption of
> an ethical society.
> 
> Joe Esposito