RE: SPAM-LOW: RE: Question regarding ILL

[AnnaJGieschen@sio.midco.net]

I'd like to make a general comment about this, probably not relevant to
COR's website and its process for purchasing individual articles:

Although we are increasingly realizing that pay-per-view needs to be a
more frequently used tool for supplying requested documents for our users,
we find that many publishers' websites make it really difficult to figure
our how to make such a purchase, or they have no option for immediate
electronic delivery.  In those cases the ILL system is more effective and
efficient. Some publishers' sites are just great though, where an easily
located interface for a $5-$20 payment by credit card brings the article
immediately to the screen for viewing, a scenario that ILL can't often
match. I'd like to make a general plea to the publishing world to make
such ease the standard situation.

Anna Gieschen, Librarian, Reference Services
Wegner Health Sciences Information Center
Sioux Falls, South Dakota


Quoting D Anderson <dh-anderson@corhealth.com>:

> As a publisher, we have no problem with occasional ILLs involving our
> content. We understand that libraries exist to serve the information needs
> of those who seek services.
> 
> The problem is that as electronic distribution makes ILLs easier, an
> increasing number of library subscribers are dropping subscriptions in
> favor of obtaining what they need through ILLs. We then have to push up
> subscription prices for the remaining subscribers to make up for the lower
> volume, which places an increasing burden on larger institutions.
> 
> What's particularly irksome is to read MedLib-l list requests for our
> material from list members who cheerily add, "We'd like to get it for
> free, of course! But we're willing to pay up to $25." We've longed offered
> single-article access for $6.95, and we've considered dropping the price
> further. But it seems some libraries prefer the ILL process, no matter how
> easy or inexpensive it is to purchase content from a publisher.
> 
> We don't prohibit ILLs. But theoretically, one library could subscribe to
> our publications and then offer free ILLs to everyone else. That won't
> happen because research libraries simply won't be able to bear the
> increasing burden of growing numbers of freeloaders. And then many
> publications will simply disappear.
> 
> Dean H. Anderson
> Publisher
> 
> COR Health
> http://www.corhealth.com