Re: [ACAT] SkyRiver Files Antitrust Suit Against OCLC

From: john g marr <jmarr_at_nyob>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:25:26 -0600
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010, Chris Blackman wrote:

> It is interesting that many of *us* (if you truly think of OCLC as a 
> cooperative) are also customers of III.

  Disclaimer: the following is not a criticism of any of the vendors of 
library products currently members of Autocat (although it might be 
helpful if they would all meet together to collaborate), but of general 
assumptions.

  Anyone care to comment on the amenability of commercial ILS, OPAC and 
bibliographic record vendors to standardization, flexibility, 
interoperability, responsiveness and innovation (pun intended) relative to 
profit margin and OCLCs practices?

   Here we are talking about the value of OCLC, AACR and RDA cataloging 
standards, ostensibly developed by librarians, but we have yet to 
collaborate to attempt to develop a "non-profit" relatively standardized 
but adaptable ILS (or at least OPAC) that would be best fit to the "rules" 
only we fully understand and respect.

  Could OCLC perhaps argue that only such an organization as itself could 
develop what librarians and library patrons want and need efficiently and 
that market competition is not only inappropriate but detrimental to 
quality, affordability and even relevance where the unfettered operations 
of "public" enterprises (e.g. armies and libraries) is involved?

  IMHO, size and responsibility matter here also.  Individual (presently 
relatively small?) competing commercial vendors of library products chose 
to take risks entering a new market ("Hey, why not commercialize 
libraries?") and will also eventually try to dominate their market (*us*) 
while being more concerned with profit than library activities, so why not 
let OCLC do it more efficiently, practically, and directly?  Consider 
this: are $600 toilet seats and "pay-toll" catalogs and computers in the 
offing for libraries once the small vendors are driven away by large 
for-profit corporations not responsible to *us* in any way?

  I guess what is apparent here is the fact that people often assume 
nothing can be attempted except for financial gain (although we are taking 
a look at open-source publication as a first step in the right direction, 
if it can be defended), and the idea of tithing the time of a few good 
librarians (or vendors) for the benefit of all runs counter to the 
provincial attitudes of local budgeters and the entire sociopolitical 
system (e.g. any situation where 3 or more people interact).

Cheers!

jgm
                                             John G. Marr
                                             Cataloger
                                             CDS, UL
                                             Univ. of New Mexico
                                             Albuquerque, NM 87131
                                             jmarr_at_unm.edu
                                             jmarr_at_flash.net


     **There are only 2 kinds of thinking: "out of the box" and "outside 
the box."

Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but
sharing is permitted.
Received on Fri Jul 30 2010 - 13:56:45 EDT