Point well taken. But the fact that the courts seem more likely to appoint
the rights to a for-profit than to a non-profit is disheartening.
Cindy Harper, Systems Librarian
Colgate University Libraries
charper_at_colgate.edu
315-228-7363
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Julia Bauder <julia.bauder_at_gmail.com>wrote:
> I think the legal risks are probably the deciding factor, more so than
> not wanting to expend the resources or not seeing the ability to
> profit. I know plenty of libraries expending plenty of resources to
> scan out-of-copyright materials, but from a management perspective
> it's much easier to budget for the known costs of a scanner, some
> folks to operate them, and a few servers than it is to budget for the
> possibility of losing a multi-million dollar copyright lawsuit.
>
> Julia
>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Cindy Harper <charper_at_colgate.edu> wrote:
> > And http://hathitrust.org <%20http://hathitrust.org>. And the answer
> is
> > that corporate capitalism provides a path for shareholders to bet on
> Google
> > et al., but the funders of libraries, public and private, are not betting
> on
> > a profit from libraries. Maybe we can get some of Gates' money?
> >
> > Cindy Harper, Systems Librarian
> > Colgate University Libraries
> > charper_at_colgate.edu
> > 315-228-7363
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Michele Newberry <fclmin_at_ufl.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Joe,
> >> It is being done. See http://www.opencontentalliance.org/
> >> However, IMHO, there isn't a critical mass of libraries willing to
> expend
> >> the resources to do this in a way that can keep up with the volume the
> >> Google is handling. Or to take on the legal challenges.
> >>
> >> - Michele
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/1/2010 9:40 AM, Montibello, Joseph P. wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Stephen Paling wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "To put it a bit differently, what I want is ~in~ the document, not
> next
> >>> to it as a surrogate. The amount of information that is available
> online
> >>> now dwarfs the information available in print, and searching within
> >>> those online resources is typically far more useful to me."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I know this is a dumb question but I'll ask it anyway. How come Google
> >>> can scan books (that they get from libraries??!?) and make a huge
> >>> database out of it and make a ton of money off of it (not yet, but does
> >>> anyone think they won't?) - but libraries can't?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <overdramatic but you know what I mean> I think it's because we can't
> >>> get organized. We want MARC or FRBR or RDA or whatever. And after all
> >>> the fields have been decided on, we want a fully developed, working
> tool
> >>> to hop out of the grass. Then we want "other libraries" to use it for
> a
> >>> year or two to work out all the kinks, and then we'll be ready to form
> a
> >>> committee to examine whether this new tool will work for our users in
> >>> our specific environment.</obykwim>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> What if we scanned all those books for our own bad selves? What if we
> >>> ripped off Google's idea of making searches against full-text? This
> >>> would answer Stephen's need to find things in the book - a need that
> >>> librarians know about. (I regularly tell students that what they need
> to
> >>> do is go upstairs, get the book off the shelf, and then look at the
> >>> table of contents and index to see if the thing they're interested in
> is
> >>> covered in the book.) So we can't offer the full text of books because
> >>> of copyright issues (Google cut that Gordian knot, but anyway).
> >>> Wouldn't it help to be able to offer a clue that a specific topic, that
> >>> might not be a chapter heading or a book title or any other piece of
> >>> metadata that we would reasonably expect to create, but that is in the
> >>> text, is in the text? Wouldn't it help to offer a page preview that
> >>> shows (in a paragraph or two) someplace that the book was mentioned?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Instead of sharing metadata through OCLC, what if we shared digital
> >>> copies of books? Upload when you're done scanning, download when you
> >>> buy a copy of a physical book, edit when someone made a crappy scan on
> >>> page 32 and you can do a better one, etc? Then those scanned, uploaded,
> >>> downloaded books became part of our search index, like in Google books,
> >>> with limited previews or full text or as much as we can get away with?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Joe Montibello, MLIS
> >>>
> >>> Class of 1945 Library
> >>>
> >>> Phillips Exeter Academy
> >>>
> >>> Web: http://www.exeter.edu/library<http://www.exeter.edu/library>
> >>>
> >>> Blog: http://academylibrary.wordpress.com
> >>> <http://academylibrary.wordpress.com/>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> ~NOTE EMAIL ADDRESS CHANGE TO FCLMIN_at_UFL.EDU~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >> Michele Newberry Assistant Director for Library Services
> >> Florida Center for Library Automation 352-392-9020
> >> 5830 NW 39th Avenue 352-392-9185 (fax)
> >> Gainesville, FL 32606 fclmin_at_ufl.edu
> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>
> >
>
Received on Thu Jul 01 2010 - 15:21:50 EDT