[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Nature's Access Restrictions
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: Nature's Access Restrictions
- From: Lloyd Davidson <Ldavids@nwu.edu>
- Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 21:26:37 EDT
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Yes, I should have noted that single station access for Science was the only option we could afford, not the only one available. It is simply that the other, more generous, licensing arrangements that Science offers were, for us, prohibitively expensive. Science is, of course, trying to protect erosion of their large base of individual subscribers, on which their advertising income is based, an issue I certainly can sympathize with. This is a general issue that really needs to be addressed immediately by all sides, libraries, subscribers and publishers, as it affects a number of publishers and journals. It would be most helpful for the cause of scholarly communication if Science and Nature, in particular, were able to design subscription plans around a single standard that would provide affordable access for libraries and still give incentive for individual subscribers to subscribe. Value added access for individual subscribers is one possibility. Geographically limiting access and limiting the number of simultaneous users are others. While degrading library access is hurtful to academic libraries, it might be made more palatable if individual librarians were allowed to provide full access for the occasional emergency request. Unfortunately, most publishers do not seem to be willing to work with librarians to design access policies and licenses that are adequately mutually beneficial. It will, clearly, take some inventive design of licenses and access policies to overcome the difficulties both sides are experiencing during this period of transformation from print to electronic journal subscriptions. Perhaps the trusted system model could provide some solutions to this quandary. We don't know because, as far as I am aware, no one has explored this, although I would be surprised if Elsevier and other publishers were not studying publisher-controlled technological fixes to the problem of access control (digital rights management systems like DigiBox or Cryptolope, for example). The recent addition of ContentGuard to some publishers' PDF files is indicative of what industry is doing in this area. I would argue that making access prohibitively expensive for many libraries is not the best long-term solution. Libraries and publishers are mutually dependent and weakening one weakens both. The Science usage reports provided by AAAS are, by the way, interesting but I don't believe they provide information about how those members of the institution who access Science through their individual subscription logons use this popular journal. I suspect that, at Northwestern at least, most use of the online version is by individual subscribers (mainly faculty, graduate students and post docs) who logon through their personal accounts from their offices rather than by way of our public Science dedicated terminals. As a personal subscriber to Science, I only have to pay an additional $15 or so a year for full access to its online version from any terminal I can get to the Internet on (as long as I remember by logon ID and password), a feature I utilize frequently. I certainly don't expect Science to provide this level of access to libraries, but surely we could come up with a reasonable service package that would satisfy all parties if we worked together to design one. Lloyd At 12:25 10/17/1999 -0400, you wrote: >Lloyd, > >A clarification is needed concerning your comments about Science. >Science's library workstation model is targeted at the many high school >and public libraries that take Science in print and do not need >'site-wide' access. While this model was indeed the first we introduced, >it is not the only model available. Since Setember of 1998, over a year >ago, Science Online has also been available through a site-wide >subscription model, no passwords required, and minimal limitations on >remote access. Earlier this month, we also introduced usage reports for >institutional Science Online subscribers. > >If you or others on lib-license would like more information about >Science Online site-wide subscriptions, feel free to contact me (contact >information below) or your subscription agent. You can also work with >Vicky Reich at Highwire, or non-US institutions may wish to contact Jane >Pennington in our Cambridge UK office. > >Mike Spinella >AAAS/Science >phone: 202 326-6424 >email: mspinell@aaas.org
- Prev by Date: Re: Electronic availability
- Next by Date: follow up on Science Online access and pricing issues
- Prev by thread: Re: Nature's Access Restrictions
- Next by thread: Digital Licensing Seminar - Seattle and Washington DC
- Index(es):