[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fair use (Re: Xerox ContentGuard)

auto-replies too. They can wreak havoc with the list if there are too many
in one day, i.e., the system considers these as real messages and
determines, after a certain point, that the list has reached a daily max.
So far, requests to list members don't seem to have helped, either. So let
us try again:  Those of you who use auto-responses that kick in after each
and every message you receive, please do consider disabling them, and if
you are on a system that doesn't permit this, please ask your technical
people to move to a system that's more correspondent-friendly.]


A footnote to my reply to Sommers' comment sent today:

I probably ought to have held back my response until after the Labor Day
weekend. Now, as I well know from past experience, I may confidently
expect to be flooded with automatic replies from people whose systems
mindlessly generate these usually useless notices informing me that they
are away. Isn't there enough sentiment out there to ask that these systems
be deactivated somehow? Or do people who are away enjoy rubbing it in?

Alan M. Edelson, Ph.D.


Somers, Michael wrote:

> Publishers determine most of the terms of the license agreements.
> Libraries and other subscribers may alter, to their advantage, certain
> phrases and nuances of the agreements.  By agreeing to the terms,
> both parties become responsible for the enforcement of the license
> itself.  What I worry about with such "non-intrusive mechanisms" is
> will their use be noted in the license agreements?  When
> will a library's obligation to enforce the terms of the agreement end?
> It improper use of the data from a licensed product can be traced back
> to a library what will the consequences be?  It is rather difficult to track
> use now of such products, but I would want strict wording in all my
> license agreements that a library's obligations to enforcing the terms of
> the license ends after the initial use by a patron.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Goodman [SMTP:dgoodman@Princeton.EDU]
> > Sent: Friday, September 03, 1999 6:10 PM
> > To:   liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
> > Subject:      Re: Fair use (Re: Xerox ContentGuard)
> >
> > I think publishers are entitled to a non-intrusive mechanism for enforcing
> > reasonable license terms, and the adoption of a generally known standard
> > system might facilitate appropriate and consistent licensing policies.
> > The important issue remains the license terms. Knowing the availability of
> > these techniques, librarians and publishers now ought to focus on making
> > sure that licenses include only appropriate restrictions, protect the
> > privacy rights of users, and do not diminish the established rights of
> > fair use. Perhaps the standard contracts that have been suggested should
> > now be revised to deal explicitly with this.
> >
> >
> > --
> > David Goodman
> > Biology Librarian, and
> > Co-Chair, Electronic Journals Task Force
> > Princeton University Library
> > dgoodman@princeton.edu         http://www.princeton.edu/~biolib/
> > phone: 609-258-3235            fax: 609-258-2627