RE: OCLC's New License for Bibliographic Records

[Kevin L Smith <kevin.l.smith@duke.edu>]

In my opinion, some parts of an OCLC bibliographic record are 
factual information which is not subject to copyright protection. 
Other parts may contain enough original expression to be 
protected.  Choice of subject headings might fall into the latter 
category.  Once you look at a MARC record that way, it is clear 
how complex the ownership issue is; there may be multiple 
copyright claimants for a single record.  That is what librarians 
get for being so cooperative.

But it is important to remember that OCLC is not, as I understand 
it, trying to revive its old attempt to claim copyright in either 
individual records or in the WorldCat database.  Instead, they 
are considering asserting a higher level of contractual control 
by changing the agreement that every user must agree to before 
using the OCLC database.  This is something they can do (whether 
or not is is a wise thing) as a condition of access and is an 
entirely separate matter from a copyright claim.

Kevin L. Smith, J.D.
Scholarly Communications Officer
Perkins Library, Duke University
Durham, NC  27708
919-668-4451
kevin.l.smith@duke.edu
http://library.duke.edu/blogs/scholcomm/

*****

"Kemp, Rebecca" <kempr@uncw.edu>
Sent by: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
01/29/2009 11:46 PM
To: "liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu" <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Subject RE: OCLC's New License for Bibliographic Records

In addition (and apologies for asking an elementary question), 
but are bibliographic records considered factual information, the 
kind of information that is not subject to copyright?  In other 
words, say I create a bib record at my institution.  Before I 
submit it to OCLC, do I own the copyright for that bib record, or 
is it in the public domain?

--Rebecca

Rebecca Kemp
Serials Coordinator Librarian
W.M. Randall Library
UNC Wilmington
Wilmington, NC 28403
kempr<at>uncw<dot>edu