Wiley follow up - Good news for UST

["Hulbert, Linda A." <LAHULBERT@stthomas.edu>]

Follow up on Wiley (apologies for the cross-posting)

I wanted to get back to the lists on which I posted my original 
Wiley communication.

I am happy to report that Wiley got back to me directly the day 
after the original post. The other happy news is that St. Thomas 
will be treated as a single site permitting us to sign the BAL 
license (Basic Access License) and not be required to use the EAL 
(Enhanced Access License).

We have looked at the language of both licenses closely to see 
what best serves the University of St. Thomas. We are grateful 
for the opportunity to choose rather than be locked into a kind 
of license because of a multi-site designation. I wish that 
everyone had the choice.

It appears to us that the BAL will meet all of our needs. We've 
read the license, the EBSCO license detail and looked at the 
Wiley FAQ.  The only difference we can tell is that in the BAL, 
ILL is not explicit, but it is inferred and electronic 
course-packs are not explicit but they are also inferred. More 
than silent on the matter, the language permits the activities 
without so naming them.

We worried about two more areas: access in perpetuity for the 
content purchased (to obviate the need for purchasing paper, too) 
and usage data. The license, the FAQ and EBSCO's review all 
indicate that we have access in perpetuity to subscribed data 
either by their supplying archival copy or continued access 
online. I would imagine, although it is not stated, that as 
longas we have any online Wiley content we will have access to 
purchased content online.  While we subscribe we have access back 
to 1997, if available. I would not expect them to continue access 
to unpurchased content after cancellation.

Usage data: This is a change. At one point the EAL was required 
for usage data but that is no longer true. Both the FAQ and the 
license indicate that BAL license users will have usage data.

The benefits they list at their FAQ for all subscribers: Free 
access to Counter-compliant usage data; unlimited concurrent 
users, free course-pack and walk-in user access; content back to 
1997 where available and perpetual access to content back to 
1997.

We have a few things to negotiate with Wiley - our institution 
prefers licenses to be silent on governing law if we can't have 
Minnesota and we would like to have a co-signed license.  But in 
all the important ways, we are thrilled with the BAL.

So, these are our experiences.  This is all good for UST.

I thought I would share some of the comments I got back from 
colleagues from various lists.  Because some were directed just 
to me, I am going to have them all be anonymous.

Overall, what I see is that Wiley has replaced Elsevier as the 
least valued 'partner' in the scholarly communication chain. 
Because we have a choice, we are comfortable doing business with 
Wiley.

*******

"Good for you. The root cause of the crisis in scholarly 
communication is the absurdist price demands of big publishing."

*******

"The answer is for libraries simply to say they won't pay, and if 
that means that for a year or so they have to do without 
so-called 'must have' content, so be it."

*******

"The multi-site definition of Wiley is less than helpful.  I have 
ranted about this last year on this list and on lis-e-journals, 
when they wanted to inflict their unworkable definitions also on 
those sites that had existing agreements with Blackwell. It is 
not helpful at all if institutions that formerly were treated as 
single-site by Blackwell are now suddenly considered multi-site 
by Wiley-Blackwell."

*******

"Wiley-Blackwell - please wake-up and offer conditions that are 
workable, especially during the current recession."

*******

"This is exactly the kind of flexibility that ICOLC asked for in 
its latest Statement on the Global Economic Crisis and Its Impact 
on Consortial Licenses The principles suggested there are not 
only valid in the consortial context."

"Principle 1:  Flexible pricing that offers customers real 
options, including the ability to reduce expenditures without 
disproportionate loss of content, will be the most successful. 
In stable times, standardized pricing and terms may work 
relatively well.  Today, purchasers will be under heavy pressure 
to reduce their outlays and need solutions that let them do so 
while continuing to offer as much content and service as 
possible.  It is in the publisher best interest that we avoid 
all-or-nothing, take-it-or-leave-it decisions and options, whose 
lack of flexibility is likely to result in far greater damage 
than is absolutely necessary.

"Principle 2:  It is in the best interest of both publishers and 
consortia to seek creative solutions that allow licenses to 
remain as intact as possible, without major content or access 
reductions.  Content, once discontinued, will be very difficult 
to reinstate at a later date. While there may be practical limits 
to this principle, publishers, authors, scholars, and libraries 
will be best served by those solutions that retain as much access 
to as much content as possible."

*******

"...by all means, if a publisher is inflexible in this way, just 
get out of the contract and cancel all what you can, including 
duplicates if you still have any. But talk to your university 
library board first, and get their approval.... There was a clear 
willingness [here] to accept a period of reduced access in 
exchange for a sustainable system."

********

"Don't worry. It's not the end of the world, if you have to 
cancel a lot of subscriptions from one of those big publishers. 
Concentrate on deals with publishers who offer effective 
collections and are flexible enough to accommodate your needs."

*******

  "Thank you Linda for slogging through this and sharing it with 
all of us. I have read that in the past their BAL had hidden 
costs and consequences in an attempt to force us into the EAL 
model so we need to monitor it closely."

*******

"The Wiley World gives me a headache."

"I am sorry that Wiley has (to say the least) been less than 
forward thinking in their negotiations with you, and I admire the 
strong stance that you have taken!"

"I can say that we also suffered from the Wiley takeover. "

*******

"As far as them considering you a multi-site license and forcing 
you into an EAL, as well as the rigid nature of the EAL in 
general, it is all just so evil and unethical."

*******

"...by moving to Online Only subscriptions, but having a Basic, 
instead of Enhanced License, we have NO ACCESS TO USAGE DATA!!!!" 
[N. B.: We're reading the licenses closely to see if this is 
true.]

*******

"It is the most ridiculous "rule" I have ever heard of and can 
only have been put into place to try and force clients into the 
Enhanced Access License."

*******

"I have passed this letter on to all of our faculty in the 
library.  I was glad to see that we are not alone in our 
troubles."

*******

"We are going to have to make cuts for our FY11 year.  I will 
strongly recommend that we start with titles held by publishers 
that are not willing to work with libraries.  The publishers are 
only hurting themselves with these attitudes as the library is 
their biggest customer.  (Publishers, are you listening?)"

*******

"We have a consortial arrangement for our Wiley titles.  Every 
year, it is a nightmare.  Wiley is difficult to work with and 
their system is confusing .  I would not shed a tear of remorse 
if we were to drop every Wiley title.  (Also Elsevier for that 
matter)"

*******

"Enhanced Access License vs. Basic Access License (BAL): 
Oxymoron, a figure of speech by which a locution produces an 
incongruous, seemingly self-contradictory effect (Compliments of 
dictionary.reference.com)."

*******

"Thanks for standing up to them. I know it's hard, it's really 
painful, but someone has to start."

*******

"... Blackwell titles, which of course are no longer any good 
because of Wiley's lack of foresight in honoring their agreement 
to keep Blackwell titles as is."

*******

"Good job! There is no other publisher right now as detestable as 
Wiley -- none. Elsevier is looking downright cuddly in 
comparison. When I go to serials librarian meetings with other 
librarians in my consortium, the first thing we all do is a 
collective vent about Wiley..."

*******

Thank you for all your comments and commiseration and for Wiley 
being willing to reconsider our status as a single site.

Linda Hulbert, Associate Director
  Collection Management and Services
O'Shaughnessy-Frey Library #5004
University of Saint Thomas
St. Paul, MN 55105
Phone: (651) 962-5016
Fax: (651) 962-5486
email: lahulbert@stthomas.edu