[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Automatic Renewal in Licenses?
- To: <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: Automatic Renewal in Licenses?
- From: "David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 19:18:34 EDT
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
I do not know what the law is, and think it might vary by state, but I do know what the problem is: Automatic renewal was, I think, common with paper--subscriptiions were normally enterted on a "till forbid" basis , under the assumption that most libraries continued all of theirs' almost all the time, and that having a subscription expire each year and need to be reinstated ran a great risk of missing issues. They were normally ordered through an agent, and tthose were the instructions given--the agent generally would also have been willing to have the library subscribe year by year. Even if the subscriptions themselves could not be ordered on an aautomatic renewal basis--as was the case with many non-academic titles, the agent could still be given such instructions. And conceivably the same might apply to legal restrictions on the publishers. (The point of such legal restrictions is to prevent abuses involving personal suibscribers.) For some of the early database services, contracts were entered on the same basis--with the added factor than interruption of service would be noticed by the patron much sooner. But this meant that the library had to have a way of checking that the subscriptions were still wanted each year before the cancellation date. Doing this usually was the responsibility of the acquisitions dept., the relevant selector, and the e-resources commitee or the equivalent. Unfortunately, the divided responsibility meant that in many cases, cancellations were not made in time. Further, these subscriptions were not normally ordered through agents, and the library had to track them as exceptions. Since each contract involved a great deal of money compared to an ordinary journal subscription , these mistakes were expensive. . Many of the earlier e-journal publishers, especially those who sold the electronic access as an add-on, then switched to year-by-year renewal for at least the electronic version. Since sometimes the print was ordered through the agent and the electronic supplementary fee paid to the publisher, many erros were inevitable. journals stopped working on Jan. 1, and sometimes took many months to get started again. The publishers instituted the same month's grace period common in paper--and the result was that many stopped working on Feb.1. By now most libraries have a way of tracking this, and there are fewer problems of that sort. So from the point of view of the libraries, either system can work. (Or fail). David Goodman LIU School of Library and Information science email@example.com -----Original Message----- From: firstname.lastname@example.org on behalf of Ann Okerson Sent: Sun 6/6/2004 4:51 PM To: email@example.com Subject: Automatic Renewal in Licenses? Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT) From: amy beitzel <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Liblicense Web Site Feedback I've heard that any mention of "automatic renewal" in a license agreement is now illegal. Can you cite me the law pertaining to this? Vendors may not automatically renew online subscription databases, in other words. ___