[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Not amendable"
- To: "liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu" <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: Re: "Not amendable"
- From: kbridges <karl.bridges@uvm.edu>
- Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 21:48:23 EST
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
cross out the stuff you don't want. Either they agree or you get better terms elsewhere. Not always possible but in the end they do want to sell product... On Feb 27, 2011, at 8:25 AM, "Schwartz, Judy" <Schwartzj@Trocaire.edu> wrote: > Well, you could always cross it off and send it back; then see > what happens. This week, a vendor sent a licensing for us to > stream their content; there was a very offending paragraph within > the license. I emailed the vendor and said that no other vendor > requires access to our CMS to see how we are using the product, > and if we had to do that, we wouldn't - it was a deal breaker. > > Looks like it was 'boiler-plate' verbiage; the rep said she > didn't know it was there, and the part about temporary access - > well, they understand not everyone can do that. I could cross > off the part or she would send a new one; I opted for the latter. > > More about licensing information here, recommended from a webinar > including Paul Wrynn: http://nnlm.gov/mar/rsdd/elicense.html; > http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/dbckfrm1.htm > > Judy > > Judith K Schwartz, MLS > Director of Library Services > Trocaire College - the Mercy College of WNY > 360 Choate Ave > Buffalo NY 14220-2094 > Buffalo, NY > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu > Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 8:57 PM > To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu > Subject: RE: Peggy Hoon on licenses > > > On Wed, 23 Feb 2011, Panyarak Ngamsritragul wrote: >> I have been involving library services for 2 years only. What I >> have noticed so far about the practice here is the vendor sent >> the license to us and request us to sign the license. Recently >> we purchase a Law database and were also sent a license. I >> reviewed the license terms and ask them to amend only a >> definition so that it will cover what we are expecting. The >> response from the dealer(s) is "It is a standard license used >> everywhere in the world and is amendable". I insisted that the > > I forgot to type a "not" here... The last line should read: > > everywhere in the world and is not amendable". I insisted that the > > Sorry for the mistake. > > Panyarak Ngamsritragul > Prince of Songkla University (Thailand)
- Next by Date: RE: Peggy Hoon on licenses
- Next by thread: RE: Peggy Hoon on licenses
- Index(es):