| Previous by Date |
Index by Date
Threaded Index |
Next by Date |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Thread | Next by Thread |
Re: EJournal Aggregation
The issue for me is scalability. We cannot negotiate every title. We need the aggregators to work with the knowledgeable people (you and others) and get something that most will agree to. In the end I hope that all titles will be aggregatable by all aggregators in the same way as all titles are handled by all vendors now (nearly all periodicals can be vended by periodicals vendors). I also have a gnawing suspicion that we will discover in the digital world, where we can track usage in a way not now possible, that most of what is being published is used so seldom that this knowledge will begin to impact licensing, prices, etc. Anthony W. Ferguson Associate University Librarian Columbia University Libraries Tel. 212-854-2270 Fax. 212-222-0331 Net: ferguson@Columbia.edu _______________________________________________ > Question for Paul and others: > > How aggregated is aggregation when, as Paul Gherman writes of OCLC's > ejournal service: > > >The publishers establishes whatever license agreement they care to with > >libraries. [and the aggregator offers the actual access] > > The is the model that others are proposing as well. Now, on the one hand, > this pleases me because I emphatically feel we NOT have arrived at the > point where ejournal (or other e-content) licenses are standard and > acceptable enough for libraries to allow an intermediary/aggregator to > consolidate the licensing part of the work for us. Also, these aggregators > are licensees themselves and are not necessarily in the best position to > represent customers' interests vis a vis license language. We (libraries) > can generally get better use terms for ourselves directly than by taking > what an aggregator offers. > > BUT -- surely one of the largest parts of the effort related to accessing > econtent is the *licensing* negotiations. The bind is that aggregators > currently cannot help us with this matter. Does anyone see any way out of > this, or are we (as I believe) in a position of negotiating singly and > directly an increasing number of licenses each month, while waiting a few > years for some acceptable practices and language to emerge? At that > point, the aggregators could add licenses to their arsenal of services for > libraries. The objective of this list and the Liblicense project overall > is to hasten that day; are there other ways? > > Ann Okerson
|
http://www.library.yale.edu/liblicense © 1996, 1997 Yale University Library |
Please read our Disclaimer E-mail us with feedback |
|