[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
follow up re: end user indemnification
- To: "liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu" <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: follow up re: end user indemnification
- From: "Kemp, Rebecca Laura" <rkemp@email.unc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 17:15:10 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Hi, again, all- I have gotten some requests for a report on what I learned from my Counsel's office, so I thought I would share. Here is what I found out: There is no *legal* reason that my institution would need to prohibit our library patrons from entering into a click-through agreement with a vendor that requires end users to indemnify the vendor, as long as the patrons agree only for themselves and not on behalf of the university. In other words, it is legally acceptable for our patrons to sign/click through this kind of agreement; there is no prohibition against it. In light of this, it is completely up to our campus libraries to decide whether we want to create a policy that says we will not pass on such end-user agreements to our patrons. I am not sure how all the libraries on my campus feel about this; it would take some discussion to come to an agreement. As of now, we have no such policy. Our Counsel's office suggested that we could try these options: 1.We could create some sort of intermediate click-through screen for our patrons that indicates that when they agree to the vendor's click-through, they are taking on the risk of indemnifying the vendor. I think that the likelihood that patrons would read and/or understand this is low, however. 2.We could simply walk away from the contract and hope that the vendor is willing enough to secure our business that they would allow us to get rid of the end user indemnification (or perhaps even the whole end user agreement). I am not sure how it will work out in this particular case, but this seems like the better option to me. Sorry that this is not ideal. I would appreciate it if vendors would not create end-user agreements at all but rather rely on the institutional license. --Rebecca -----Original Message----- From: Kemp, Rebecca Laura Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 10:44 AM To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: thank you re: end user indemnification Hi, all- I just wanted to thank those of you who responded to my question below. I got some interesting feedback, and I think that I'll have to talk with my University Counsel's office for the next step. Best wishes, Rebecca > On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Rebecca Kemp > <rkemp@email.unc.edu> wrote: > >> I've run across a scenario where a publisher requires end >> users to enter into an end user agreement in which the end >> user agrees to indemnify the publisher. Is there any language >> that can be used in the institutional license to mitigate this >> indemnification? I think in this particular case, we're not >> going to be able to change anything, but for my future >> reference, has anyone had experience with a situation like >> this? >> >> --Rebecca >> >> Rebecca Kemp >> E-Resources Acquisitions Librarian >> UNC-Chapel Hill >> Chapel Hill, NC 27514-8890
- Prev by Date: More than 25 million records in BASE
- Next by Date: AIP replaces five-year backfile with online access back to 1999
- Previous by thread: More than 25 million records in BASE
- Next by thread: Re: follow up re: end user indemnification
- Index(es):