Re: concepts of perpetuity

[Adam Hodgkin <adam.hodgkin@gmail.com>]

I am not so sure about this.

To slightly rephrase Sally's formulation. Could one trust an 
aggregator or publisher that offered to maintain access 
'indefinitely"? I suspect that a publisher who promised to 
maintain a digital service perpetually without additional charges 
might not be trusted. But if they promised to maintain it 
indefinitely? Perhaps such an assurance would be trustworthy. See 
the way consumer oriented services such as gmail and flickr seem 
to be believed when they offer apparently indefinite free access. 
And what about an indefinite service for really tiny fees? 
Suppose a business offered to maintain indefinite access for some 
very small recurrent charge (like 1%, or 0.5%, or .01% pa) of an 
outright purchase cost), would they be trusted? I think that an 
honest offer of 'indefinite free access' may be sustainable and 
credible. But, as i said at the beginning I am not sure about it.

And I agree that the answer to Anne's original question is 'No'.

Adam Hodgkin


On 28 Aug 2008, at 02:37, Sally Morris ((Morris Associates)) wrote:

> I don't think either Nawin or Karl has quite taken my point.  I
> was simply trying to say that 'perpetual' (i.e. 'for ever') is
> not a promise anyone can realistically make!
>
> As far as medium-term access is concerned, I'd actually go
> further than Nawin.  I believe quite strongly that when
> publishers sell or transfer a journal, they have a continuing
> obligation to those customers who paid, in good faith, for a
> licence which included 'continuing access'.  They should ensure
> that there is an arrangement in place for either the new
> publisher or the old one to honour those obligations
>
> The ALPSP guidelines on 'When a society journal changes
> publisher' (http://www.alpsp.org/ForceDownload.asp?id=101 - for
> some reason now only available, I believe, to ALPSP members) make
> this clear.  The TRANSFER group is also working on (somewhat more
> prescriptive) guidelines
>
> Sally Morris
> Consultant, Morris Associates (Publishing Consultancy)
> South House, The Street
> Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK
> Email:  sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk
>
> ____
>
> I agree with Sally that no publisher can make a promise of
> perpetual access to journals.  It is untenable in a business
> where journals often change publishers/ownership.  And how does
> one account for deferred liabilities associated with serving a
> "perpetual" term?  On the other hand, providing for
> post-cancellation access as long as the journal in question
> continues to be owned (or published) by the publisher making the
> offer, is something institutional subscribers should expect to
> receive as part of a subscription.  Although, in my view, it is a
> short-sighted practice, some publishers are asking for
> maintenance fees to manage and service post-cancellation access.
>
> Nawin Gupta
> nawin.gupta@comcast.net
> www.nawingupta.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Sally
> Morris (Morris
> Associates)
> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 5:24 PM
> To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
> Subject: RE: concepts of perpetuity
>
> 'Perpetual' is a promise no one can make (least of all about
> journal access ;-))
>
> I prefer to call it 'continuing access'.  I believe that what
> actually concerns libraries is medium-term, post-cancellation (or
> post-disaster) access, rather than true long-term preservation.
> And even long-term preservation could not truthfully be called
> 'perpetual'
>
> Sorry, pedant speaking!
>
> Sally Morris
> Consultant, Morris Associates (Publishing Consultancy)
> South House, The Street
> Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK
> Email:  sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk