RE: OCLC's New License for Bibliographic Records =A0

["B.G. Sloan" <bgsloan2@yahoo.com>]

Chuck Hamaker said "I think, but am not certain that the 'rest'
of the paragraph suggests the possibility of negotiating
separately with OCLC on the policy."

Could be. But I'm guessing that the "except...as otherwise
required by applicable law" clause is OCLC's attempt to
streamline the process of accomodating the requirements of state
institutions regarding legal venue.

Before I retired from the University of Illinois I participated
in many, many reviews of vendor contracts. Legal venue was always
a no-brainer because of state law, and every contract had to be
amended so that Illinois law prevailed.

I'm thinking OCLC's legal counsel has had to deal with that
"problem" so much that they decided to try to find an "automatic"
way to deal with it, to cut down on legal overhead costs.

I'm betting that it was in OCLC's self interest to minimize
contract changes, and the "except...as otherwise required by
applicable law" was one way to do that.

Bernie Sloan
Sora Associates
Bloomington, IN

--- On Sun, 2/1/09, Hamaker, Charles <cahamake@uncc.edu> wrote:

From: Hamaker, Charles <cahamake@uncc.edu>
Subject: RE: OCLC's New License for Bibliographic Records
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Date: Sunday, February 1, 2009, 1:59 PM

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
---2071850956-1828527948-1233707025=:15820--