RE: OCLC's New License for Bibliographic Records

["Hamaker, Charles" <cahamake@uncc.edu>]

Bernie: I think , but am not certain that the "rest" of the 
paragraph suggests the possibility of negotiating separately with 
OCLC on the policy:

"This Policy shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance 
with the laws of the State of Ohio and the United States of 
America, without regard to principles of conflict of laws, except 
(i) as otherwise provided in a separate agreement with OCLC which 
incorporates this Policy; or (ii) as otherwise required by 
applicable law."

The guidelines I work with call for venue to be North Carolina, 
or to remain silent on venue. It's an either or as far as I can 
tell. ii above as you suggest might let us squeak through. I'd 
have to ask legal counsel. I'm not sure what "without regard to 
principles of conflict of laws"  means in this context

And I'm not sure I can give intellectual content created by the 
University to OCLC to control. I'm pretty sure I'm not permitted 
to do that. Isn't that what the license is doing ultimately, 
making OCLC policies the controlling point for intellectual 
property created by universities--or am I misunderstanding the 
intent?

If a scholar creates a bibliography modifying OCLC records, 
(cleaning up the bibliographic fine points but perhaps citing 
holdings) does this policy mean that to publish it the researcher 
has to get OCLC's permission?

Chuck


-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of B.G. Sloan
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:16 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: OCLC's New License for Bibliographic Records

Chuck Hamaker said:

"This section alone makes this a license that my library cannot
agree to at all. Venue as, OCLC should know if they'd talked with
many member libraries, is non-negotiable for many state
institutions."

Isn't this covered by the clause "except...as otherwise required
by applicable law"??

Bernie Sloan
Sora Associates
Boomington, IN