[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Licenses that forbid ILL (was Re: Roundtable Press Release)
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: Licenses that forbid ILL (was Re: Roundtable Press Release)
- From: "Anne E. McKee" <anne@gwla.org>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 21:38:43 EST
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
The Greater Western Library Alliance has also successfully transitioned away from the "print out and send" ILL for the past several years. Anne E. McKee, M.L.S. Program Officer for Resource Sharing Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA) www.GWLA.org Glendale, AZ 85310 anne@GWLA.org -----Original Message----- From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu [mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Chen, Xiaotian Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 6:29 PM To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: RE: Licenses that forbid ILL (was Re: Roundtable Press Release) Requiring "that the lending library print out a copy of the article and use that to initiate the loan" was more common in the past than present, even though it is still pretty common. I am wondering why the library community in general still can live with this requirement that was written in the 1990s. Can we save some time and trees by getting rid of this 1990s "printing out" requirement? CARLI, the academic library consortium in my state of Illinois, seems to be doing just that with all publishers. See P. 3 for Interlibrary Loan at http://www.carli.illinois.edu/reports/board/LicensingPrinciples.pdf. Xiaotian Chen Electronic Services Librarian Bradley University Peoria, Illinois 61625 ________________________________ From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu on behalf of Todd Puccio Sent: Wed 1/27/2010 5:24 PM To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: RE: Licenses that forbid ILL (was Re: Roundtable Press Release) Most of my newer licenses specify that methods of "Secure Transmission" (such as Ariel...) for the practice of Interlibrary Loan according to CONTU guidelines etc. are acceptable. If not, I ask them to add that language into the document. It never hurts to simply ask. This exists in at least 80% of my vendor contracts. As they expire and new ones are drawn up I ask them to add it. Basically we are no longer accepting generic licenses so easily. It is a bit of a pain to get this through the University Lawyer but we're working on improving that, too. Todd Puccio -----Original Message----- From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu [mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Jim Stemper Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 7:01 PM To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: Licenses that forbid ILL (was Re: Roundtable Press Release) On Fri, 22 Jan 2010, T Scott Plutchak wrote: "In my experience there are very few licenses that flat out prevent interlibrary loan. In most cases, publishers require that the lending library print out a copy of the article and use that to initiate the loan, rather than sending the pdf directly. Personally, I think this is an unnecessary inconvenience, but we're still able to make the loan." ***
- Prev by Date: Re: NY Times to Charge for Frequent Access to Its Web Site
- Next by Date: Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication
- Previous by thread: RE: Licenses that forbid ILL (was Re: Roundtable Press Release)
- Next by thread: Harvard's Recommendations to President Obama on Public Access Policy
- Index(es):