Karen's blog notes: "The original settlement had a strange exception that removed OCLC networks from the definition of 'consortium'."
I still think the settlement's definition of "consortium" is odd. Now consortia are defined as OCLC networks and members of the International Coalition of Library Consortia (ICOLC). ICOLC members are mostly academic library consortia, so that leaves out a LOT of multitype consortia.
Bernie Sloan
--- On Sat, 11/14/09, Karen Coyle <lists_at_kcoyle.net> wrote:
From: Karen Coyle <lists_at_kcoyle.net>
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Revised Google Books Settlement
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Date: Saturday, November 14, 2009, 3:55 PM
I've posted a short analysis of changes of particular interest to libraries (at least, of the ones I noted on a first frantic pass through the text):
http://kcoyle.blogspot.com
A couple of them are really odd.
kc
Quoting "B.G. Sloan" <bgsloan2_at_YAHOO.COM>:
>
> The revised Google Books settlement is now avaikable at:
>
> http://thepublicindex.org/docs/amended_settlement/amended_settlement_redline.pdf
>
> They've used change-tracking in the document, so it's easy to see what the changes are.
>
> A Library Journal article on the revised settlement is available at:
>
> http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6707181.html
>
> Bernie Sloan
>
>
>
>
--Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Sat Nov 14 2009 - 18:38:30 EST