Karen Coyle said "I am of the impression that they haven't yet much of an idea of what the Institution Subscription will look like."
After reading the original settlement agreement several times, I was of the impression that Google didn't have much of an idea of how just about anything was going to work out as far as library use is concerned. A librarian reading that document for enlightenment will probably come away with more questions than he or she had before reading the document.
Back in the day when I reviewed vendor contracts for a living, my boss had a fondness for "creative ambiguity" in contract language. I'm thinking the original settlement agreement took that idea to the next level...it seemed to be saying something without really saying anything substantive.
Hopefully the many objections that have been filed will result in a tighter settlement agreement.
Bernie Sloan
--- On Mon, 11/2/09, Karen Coyle <lists_at_kcoyle.net> wrote:
From: Karen Coyle <lists_at_kcoyle.net>
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] "Limited" Google Books Search ?
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Date: Monday, November 2, 2009, 5:31 PM
Quoting "Walker, David" <dwalker_at_CALSTATE.EDU>:
> Thanks, Ed. I guess it helps to read the "Definitions" section of the document. :-P
>
> Section 4.1 (c) says that "Google may work through intermediaries to sell Institutional Subscriptions." I wonder, then, if maybe libraries will be able to license smaller sets of Google Book Search though one of these "intermediaries," maybe like how we are licensing Safari books through Proquest?
I've been at meetings where Dan Clancy of Google Books has been asked this question and his answer has been: We are not ruling it out.
I am of the impression that they haven't yet much of an idea of what the Institution Subscription will look like. They have 5 years from the effective date of the agreement to come out with it. In my opinion, they would do well to find a library-experienced vendor to be the provider -- I just can't see Google providing the kind of service support that libraries are accustomed to. (Plus, there was the choice comment by Dan Clancy in the first ALA meeting on the topic when someone asked him if they'd consider working with consortia for the subscriptions, and his reply was something like: "Yes, there's no way we want to deal with getting $5,000 checks from a lot of little libraries." Which made me think that he has no idea of the reality of doing business with libraries, and will probably be better off not finding out. )
kc
>
> --Dave
>
> ==================
> David Walker
> Library Web Services Manager
> California State University
> http://xerxes.calstate.edu
> ________________________________________
> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Ed Jones [ejones_at_NU.EDU]
> Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 12:19 PM
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] "Limited" Google Books Search ?
>
> Limited Subscription is defined in 1.83 as "an Institutional Subscription offered to a library that allows the subscribing library access only to the Books Digitized from that library, or only to the Books held by that library."
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Walker, David
> Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 11:30 AM
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Subject: [NGC4LIB] "Limited" Google Books Search ?
>
> Section 4.1 (a)(vi)(1)(b) of the proposed Google Book Search settlement [1], in talking about "institutional subscriptions," says:
>
> Subscription for each of the classes of institutions identified in
> Section 4.1(a)(iv) (Pricing Bands), including Institutional
> Subscriptions for each of the discipline-based collections that may
> be offered, Institutional Subscriptions that provide access to the
> entire Institutional Subscription Database, and any Limited
> Subscriptions.
>
> As far as I can tell, "Limited Subscriptions" is nowhere else defined in the document. I'm curious is if anyone has any insight into this?
>
> I ask because, the document says in an earlier section that institutional subscriptions will be based on "prices for comparable products and services." Based on what we're paying now for, say, Safari, I'm guessing a 10-million (or so) volume e-book collection is going to be VERY expensive.
>
> Further, the document says that Google can (only?) offer two "versions" of subscriptions: (1) the entire database, or (2) "discipline-based collections."
>
> It seems to me, though, that if an undergraduate institution cannot afford the entire GBS database -- which I think may be entirely likely -- "discipline-based" collections won't be a suitable alternative. It's not like we would only buy a Sociology GBS collection, for example, and tell everyone else they're out of luck.
>
> So I think there is a need for a version of Google Book Search that would span all disciplines, but not include all books. A kind of Google Book Search Elite (compared to Premiere or Complete), to borrow an Ebsco naming convention.
>
> I wonder, then, if the "Limited Subscription" is just such a thing?
>
> --Dave
>
> [1] http://books.google.com/booksrightsholders/Settlement-Agreement.zip
>
> ==================
> David Walker
> Library Web Services Manager
> California State University
> http://xerxes.calstate.edu
>
--Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Mon Nov 02 2009 - 20:24:33 EST