Previous by Date Index by Date
Threaded Index
Next by Date

Previous by Thread Next by Thread

Re: UMI's image removal

Rodney Stenlake wrote:
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 11:45:31 -0400
From: Rodney Stenlake <>
Subject: Re: UMI's image removal (fwd)

If I understand the issue here (licensor deletion of old licensed
material), the LIBLICENSE web site materials do ot address the matter
specifically, although it is related to the issues of ensuring that
information is updated and maintained by the licensor and perpetual access

As a technical matter, the issue becomes relevant (1) for those databases
that are purely online, and not provided physically to the library for
onsite use or (2) those databases provided physically to the library, but
where the licensor requires the library to return the old copy of the CD
Rom or tape when each new veresion is published.  In those cases, if the
vendor removes something from the database, it will forever be unavailable
to the library.  If the library can keep old cd roms or tapes, however,
then future deletions are not a problem, provided that the vendor informs
the licensee of the deletions so that the library does not throw out the
old media (atlhough it could be a logistical nightmare for the library to
keep several versions of the same database--one with the deleted material
intact, the other with it removed). 

Generally, I don't know if this should be much of a problem because
storage space is not that expensive.  I would think that systematic
editing of backlogged material would be more expensive than simply keeping
the stuff intact.  But for those instances where it is a problem, it is a
question of inserting language in the agreement. This could be dealt with
in a license under Licensor performance obligations.  Usually this clause
would say Licensor will update and maintain the database on a timely
basis.  This could be amended for magazine or book type databases to say
that "Licensor agrees that it will not delete any information in the
database (other than to make corrections or as required by law) without
notice to Licensee of its intended deletions.  Where practicable, Licensor
will provide Licensee with a copy of the database before any deletions are

Rod Stenlake                                                                
New Haven, CT 06511                                                                                                

>Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 18:06:39 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Ramya Subramanian <afrs1@UAA.ALASKA.EDU>
>Subject: UMI's image removal
>Hello everyone.
>We recently had a rather unnerving experience with UMI's ABI Inform
>Proquest Researcher II on CD, when it chose to remove (retrospectively) 
>all the images of about 1/2 a dozen important titles.  I am sure there are
>a number of libraries who, in these times of limited resources, tend to
>cut back on print subscriptions when full-text images are available
>online. Keeping up with the vendor's adds and drops is turning out to be a
>collection development nightmare. 
>I am writing to find out from this group:
>a. how other libraries are dealing with the repercussions of cd-rom
>vendors-publishers' agreements/disagreements,
>b. whether libraries are collectively voicing their concern about what
>seems to be a fairly regular problem these days with full-text products,
>c. how we can make our licenses with full-text product vendors more
>sympathetic to library needs. 
>I would appreciate hearing how some of the libraries have creatively dealt
>with these issues.    
>Thank you. 
>-Ramya Subramanian
>Electronic Resources Librarian          Phone: (907) 786-1846
>Rm 114, Consortium Library              Fax: (907) 786-6050
>University of Alaska Anchorage          Email:
>3211 Providence Drive
>Anchorage AK 99508
© 1996, 1997 Yale University Library
Please read our Disclaimer
E-mail us with feedback