Karen:
"I think it comes down to this question: am I, as a librarian, dedicated to helping people get information, or to making sure that libraries, as we know them today, continue to exist?"
Well, I say the first choice. Yet, even if I couldn't work as a librarian, I'd hope there would be others who would be able to serve the whole public at large. What if, in the end, its not an either-or, and choice number 1 can't really be accomplished to the degree it is today, without choice number 2 (understood not as libraries per se, but at least as library-like-institutions set up to serve the general public)? This seems likely to me...
Karen: "It's obvious to me that they could figure out a way to suck full library metadata out of catalogs -- that's a no-brainer."
Well, I'm not sure how easy it would be to do, but assuming you are right, perhaps it is only the law that holds them back (like with Tim and LibraryThing)? For more on that, read on.
James:
"Everyone is caught in a Catch-22 right now: if something's not on the web, it beginning to mean that it doesn't exist; you put it on the web, but people don't want to pay for it; people will seek out specific sites more and more rarely and expect it all through a Google search."
Right. I agree this is the way things are going, but in my mind, this is an ethically problematic situation, with people beginning to feel more and more entitled to every kind of media. All of us, including me, like to get something for free, but don't like it if something that we worked really hard on is taken without asking "may I" (and I am very much for "commons" space that is free for all, obviously an important part of any society). I have a hard time seeing how this can really be good in the long run: by ignoring copyright law... by thinking that we can just "mine" what we need/want for free... by letting profit-directed corporations assume the functions of publicly funded institutions: aren't we leaving many behind, and simply creating a new market targeted at those who value - and can afford to pay for - those persons who work hard to get accurate information, learning, etc.?
"If we keep everything to ourselves and expect that everyone will seek us out for our knowledge and our 'superior data' I think we are sadly mistaken."
I think this is right. But maybe OCLC thinks: with superior data and some innovation that approximates the "cutting edge", we will still be needed (perhaps not sensed by everyone, but by enough to make what we do somewhat viable in an increasingly algorithm-governed and technocratic world)?
"If we share our records--which I think is absolutely essential--it must be with everyone everywhere, so that *people* (not just corporations) can use our records to help them build their own tools so that they can succeed."
But what one person can compete with a massive corporation? And what corporation can even hope to compete with Google (which has a massive head start, with a basic monopoly on scanned books).
Answer?: OCLC?
"After all, that's what have always done: we make records and create tools so that the general public can find the information they need so that they can then go on and succeed in whatever it is they are doing."
Right - there will always be librarian-types that serve the few. But it does us good to consider that libraries as institutions that serve the general public are kind of an anomaly in human history, are they not? (even more so libraries with high quality organization!)
"Now.... do I really believe that "open" is the path to success? I don't know if there is a way out in these difficult times, but I honestly do not believe that "closed" is a solution to any of the challenges facing us."
Interesting reads, which in my mind, is related to this:
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2009/07/06/090706crbo_books_gladwell
(review of Free: the Future of a Radical Price)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/11/world/americas/11iht-hate.4.13645369.html?_r=1
Regards,
Nathan Rinne
Media Cataloging Technician
Educational Service Center
11200 93rd Avenue North
Maple Grove MN. 55369
Email: rinnen_at_district279.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Weinheimer Jim
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:05 AM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] OCLC Formally Withdraws WorldCat Policy
Nathan Rinne wrote:
> So, tech-leaders of the library world: everyone think that's a good
> idea? (because if you do, chances are better it will happen). The
> sooner I get an answer to this, the sooner I can start spending all my
> spare time exploring new career options : )
You ask a great question and it's one that has a frightening answer, but it's an answer that the newspapers, the entertainment industry, the entire publishing community are asking: is "open" the way to go? At this point in time, it's just too soon to tell. Google has done very well, but the Rocky Mountain News didn't. The New York Times, too. Did you see: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-june-10-2009/end-times. Terrifying! (But funny!)
Everyone is caught in a Catch-22 right now: if something's not on the web, it beginning to mean that it doesn't exist; you put it on the web, but people don't want to pay for it; people will seek out specific sites more and more rarely and expect it all through a Google search. Plus, in my own opinion, when (not if) the Google Books/Publishers agreement goes through (in some shape or form), and people will get full access to the digitized books, the world of information will change completely. I think it would be more than prudent for libraries to plan what their catalogs and other tools should be in that world.
If we keep everything to ourselves and expect that everyone will seek us out for our knowledge and our "superior data" I think we are sadly mistaken. But putting all of our eggs into the single "Google" basket wouldn't be wise, either. If we share our records--which I think is absolutely essential--it must be with everyone everywhere, so that *people* (not just corporations) can use our records to help them build their own tools so that they can succeed. If they succeed, we succeed.
After all, that's what have always done: we make records and create tools so that the general public can find the information they need so that they can then go on and succeed in whatever it is they are doing.
Now.... do I really believe that "open" is the path to success? I don't know if there is a way out in these difficult times, but I honestly do not believe that "closed" is a solution to any of the challenges facing us.
Jim Weinheimer
Received on Tue Jul 14 2009 - 11:09:09 EDT