[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Libraries and archiving (Re: RE: If electronic is to replacepaper)
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: Libraries and archiving (Re: RE: If electronic is to replacepaper)
- From: "Tom Sanders" <sandetr@groupwise1.duc.auburn.edu>
- Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 19:21:25 EST
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
>>> Rick Anderson <rick_anderson@uncg.edu> 11/17 4:37 PM >>> > Some very good ideas have been expressed. However, why are libraries now > advocating publishers or disinterested third parties archive electronic > journals? Libraries need to, in my opinion, archive and maintain access > to the electronic journals they have subscribed to. Hear, hear. Publishing and archiving are very, very different endeavors, and it's not fair for librarians (who have never expected publishers to act as an archive before) to suddenly insist that publishers do so now, in the electronic environment. Rick Anderson ***I don't see that it is not fair for libraries to ask publishers to handle archiving of electronic materials. It is probably unfair that libraries expect this done at no extra charge, but that is a different issue. Electronic resources can probably be best made available through a central archive with adequate mirror sites. This arrangement is less optimal for paper resources, although we sometimes seem to be moving in this direction as ever higher prices result in fewer copies and more ILL/document delivery. With paper copies we expect to incur archiving expenses (buildings, shelving, staff time) and one of the desires of library administrators in looking at electronic resources is to avoid these local expenses. Whether this is "fair" or not seems beside the point. The question comes down to "what is the best deal we can work out?" If we can get electronic access in perpetuity for no more than the initial purchase price of the paper, and the publisher is agreeable, why would we turn down such a good deal? The money we would have spent for local archiving, or which we would have paid to a third party for archiving, can go to try to balance our budgets, to acquire other resources, to expand services, etc. If the publisher can provide archiving as part of the purchase price and still turn a profit, while charging a fee libraries find reaosnable, then the deal is fair. TSanders ---------------------- Rick Anderson Head Acquisitions Librarian Jackson Library UNC Greensboro 1000 Spring Garden St. Greensboro, NC 27402-6175 PH (336) 334-5281 FX (336) 334-5399 rick_anderson@uncg.edu http://www.uncg.edu/~r_anders "Freudian apologists welcome his objections as the Undead welcome nightfall." -- Frank Cioffi (on Adolf Grunbaum)
- Prev by Date: Re: If electronic is to replace paper
- Next by Date: Re: Libraries and archiving (Re: RE: If electronic is to replace paper)
- Prev by thread: Re: Libraries and archiving (Re: RE: If electronic is to replace paper)
- Next by thread: African digital library
- Index(es):