The Licence Trap

1,038 views
1,009 views

Published on

The need for common terms for licensing scientific literature and databases: presentation at IFLA 2002

Published in: Business, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,038
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The Licence Trap

  1. 1. The licence trap The need for common terms for scientific literature and databases Chris Rusbridge, University of Glasgow09/25/12 1
  2. 2. Contents• ‘Nightmare’ paper• Updating• Licence issues• Over-riding law?• ePrints issues• Service issues09/25/12 2
  3. 3. Scenario (LIP-LINC, 1996) – 20-40 years on? – Major shift to electronic publishing – Print journals decimated – Scholarly self-publishing wide-spread – Library is a teaching/learning resource – Historians use paper for research09/25/12 3
  4. 4. Information objects? – Hyper-text consequences• writing de-linearised• information in chunks or gobbets• electronic book not a self-contained package• package boundaries un-clear09/25/12 4
  5. 5. Copyright – licences required for everything? – variety of terms & conditions – variety of pricing models – impossibility of adherence: millions of objects, thousands of licences!09/25/12 5
  6. 6. Preservation problems – Legal – Technical – Organisational (who?) – Financial – How to get a continuous commitment measured in hundreds of years?09/25/12 6
  7. 7. Updating the scenario• Hypertext? – Formal writing remains linear (mostly) • 62 journals with embedded multimedia (McKiernan) – Encyclopaedias non-linear but controlled – Web resources limited hypertext… but free • Eg Perseus – Citation linking growing • Hypertext at the article level • Still mostly within single resources • DOI and OpenURL based • Do hit barriers occasionally; mainly no citation link!09/25/12 7
  8. 8. Updating the scenario 2• Licences not so varied – Consortia impact • Yale Liblicense site (http://www.library.yale.edu/~llicense/index.shtml) • ICOLC (http://www.library.yale.edu/consortia/) • CHEST, NESLI, PA-JISC Model licence in UK (http://www.jisc.ac.uk/pub99/modellic.pdf) – Industry consolidation • Fewer agreement variations – BUT many independent publishers – Also many subtle differences09/25/12 8
  9. 9. Updating the scenario 3• Digital preservation – Remote access model • So who preserves? – Legal deposit of non-print? • Or specific preservation agreements needed – Preserving meaning09/25/12 9
  10. 10. How big is the problem?• University of Glasgow – 4500 e-journals from >1300 publishers (only 30 publishers supply > 10 journals, and around 1000 supply only 1 journal) – 350 datasets – 150 e-books(?) – Hundreds of licence agreements, mostly on paper09/25/12 10
  11. 11. Licence issues 1• Authorised users – Staff? • Employees • Visiting • Honorary – Students? • All? • Restricted faculty? • Restricted location? • Part time? • Work placements? • Continuing education?09/25/12 11
  12. 12. Licence issues 2• Walk-ins • None? • Occasional • Registered? • All? • All, but require ATHENS authentication? (Not available except for staff & students!)09/25/12 12
  13. 13. Licence issues 3• Locations? • Library? • All or part of (one or more) campuses? • Residence? • Workplace? • Anywhere in the UK? • Anywhere in the world?09/25/12 13
  14. 14. Licence issues 4• Special conditions (probably many more) – Ordnance survey complex conditions – A major publisher! • Permission needed for local storage of any part of article • ‘Except as above [photocopies, ToCs, lists of articles], no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a computer system or transmitted … by any means, electronic … or otherwise, without the prior written permission09/25/12 of the publisher’ 14
  15. 15. Over-riding laws?• Eg new Export Control Act – Controls on the transfer of technology by intangible means – Related to weapons of mass destruction and delivery systems – Academic freedom clause…09/25/12 15
  16. 16. Technical issues 1• Technical implementation – Lowest common set; often prohibit walk-in access even where allowed• Semantic web and web services?09/25/12 16
  17. 17. Technical issues 2• Digital rights management systems – Seem more concerned with tracking ownership and splitting payments (eg OASIS http://www.oasis- open.org/committees/xacml/, indecs http://www.indecs.org/) – Would need to track user types; interact with authentication & authorisation systems (eg FDRM http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july02/martin/07ma rtin.html) – Would need to express licence terms (eg XrML2 http://www.xrml.org/) – Copyright expiry & other fair use1709/25/12 issues
  18. 18. ePrints• Subversive proposal – Author self-archiving• Copyright issues – Between author and publisher, not reader or library and publisher – Pre-prints • Prior publication? – Post-prints • Need rights to mount09/25/12 18
  19. 19. Summary• Licences becoming more uniform• Technical implementation makes more uniform still• Rich technical environments some way off• We are not getting what we pay for!09/25/12 19

×