A very thoughtful note, Bernie.
I agree with you on the challenges of "licensing widespread public
access to copyrighted materials," but I think this is doable if
librarians, publishers and enlightened policymakers can present this
as an important education issue, too--far from "just" a library issue.
In that regard, it would help to have separate public and academic
library systems to protect K-12 and other interests and make the
national digital library concept easier to sell. The public system
could provide content for publib users of all ages levels;
particularly let's not forget students' typical role models--their
parents. Family literacy and all that. (I want a strong academic
system, too, of course, intertwined with the publib side. But K-12
would draw the most public support, and besides, the academic libs
have better ties to foundations and rich alumni.)
To reinforce the K-12-related arguments, LibraryCity.org notes the
connection between students' academic achievement and the number of
paper books to which they have access at home. Books online won't
necessarily do the same without major, sustained efforts by both
librarians and teachers. LibraryCity.org offers specifics, reflecting
the mainstream belief among top literacy experts that recreational
reading is a "must" for peak academic achievement. No miracles
promised. Just application of existing wisdom so that K-12 truly does
benefit.
Elsewhere, at TheAtlantic.com, I tell how we could help indirectly
cost-justify national digital library efforts--another way to help win
over the skeptics. The URLs for that and a school-related posts and
one other are below.
As for publishers, I think that many will be open to the proposed
ideas if we recognize the value they add, as well as their need to
turn a buck. Yes, the publishers, too, will have to compromise. But
look at it this way: the defense industry has not done that badly with
tax money. I favor library-developed content as one way to fill gaps
and also gain leverage with unrealistic publishers. Smart publishers
will go along; mine would in a flash.
Years ago, moreover, I was chatting with an AAP lawyer who said that
his members might indeed be open to new biz models if the money were
there. That is what I want. I'd like to see publishers and libraries
spend less time fighting over every syllable of copyright law and more
time lobbying for a library initiative that would benefit both groups.
The George State University case is bad news. But perhaps libraries
could bargain with at least some publishers for preservation of fair
use in return for working jointly on a project like a library
initiative to grow the money pot. Also, in my Chronicle of Higher
Education piece, I tell how a national digital public library system
could co-exist with e-stores. As I've noted, content diversity and
freedom of expression would benefit from a variety of business models.
Housekeeping note: Tom Peters has had to scale back his involvement
because he is snowed under with work-related maters. So his title on
the LibraryCity site is now collaborator. I've just tweaked the blog
to reflect that and will also do a short post near the top of the home
page. Tom wants to contribute in the future within the limits of his
schedule, and meanwhile he and I are looking for other
contributors--especially librarians--who care about the nuts and bolts
of issues like financing. It was Tom who suggested we start up the
group in the first place.
Meanwhile, Bernie, big thanks for caring about these matters
David Rothman, Co-Founder
LibraryCity.org
703.370.6540
http://librarycity.org/?p=547
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/06/guest-post-david-rothman-on-the-ipad-stimulus-plan/58539/
http://chronicle.com/article/Its-Time-for-a-National/126489/
(Overlaps with earlier list--but I'm repeating the citations for
people's convenience.)
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 5:57 PM, B.G. Sloan <bgsloan2_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> While I applaud David Rothman's sentiments about the National Digital Public Library concept, I find myself wondering about the likelihood of licensing widespread public access to copyrighted materials.
>
> I was involved in some early efforts to license online full-text journal article databases for the faculty, students and staff of several dozen Illinois colleges and universities. We offered our first such database in the early 1990s, with access to all library users affiliated with the Illinois Library Computer Systems Organization (ILCSO). The funds to support these subscriptions were provided by the Illinois Board of Higher Education. Tom Peters (coordinator of LibraryCity.org) was involved in some of these activities.
>
> If anything, I have the feeling it's more difficult now to license such access to copyrighted materials. Publishers seem more picky now about how their copyrighted materials are used (see: http://bit.ly/kh9nQx for one example). And the funding that supported such interlibrary cooperative activities in the past is drying up in today's economic climate. Even Google, with all its resources, has hit an intellectual property roadblock in the Google Books project.
>
> I think the key to any "national digital library" is to find some way to offer widespread public accesss to copyrighted materials at an affordable price that publishers will accept. I'm not sure that's do-able in today's publishing climate. Something/someone has to give.
>
> Bernie Sloan
>
> --- On Sun, 5/22/11, David H. Rothman <davidrothman_at_POBOX.COM> wrote:
>
>
> From: David H. Rothman <davidrothman_at_POBOX.COM>
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Bill Clinton: Create Internet agency
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Date: Sunday, May 22, 2011, 4:41 PM
>
>
> I agree with worries over censorship even if that isn't Bill Clinton's
> intent. And, yes, both librarians and journalists are solutions. No
> policing or corrections agency, though. I hate the idea.
>
> What would help would be two well-stocked national digital library
> systems--public and academic. I've raised that topic on the NGC4LIB
> list before, but since then have collaborated with librarian Tom
> Peters on the LibraryCity.org site filling in more details, including
> some thoughts on the censorship threat.
>
> I find the Digital Public Library of America initiative at Harvard to
> be especially promising, at least if the DPLA executes well and is
> more cognizant of the true costs of and need for copyrighted materials
> for popular consumption.
>
> The project urgently needs to split into (1) a Scholarly Digital
> Library of America (academic and mostly privately funded) and a
> National Digital Library of America (public and mostly publicly
> funded), with close cooperation between the two.
>
> Among many other things, cooperation could include the creation of a
> joint technical operation, as well as consolidated discovery
> mechanisms and content exchanges. Both systems would be universally
> accessible. Just the same, the priorities of academic libs and publibs
> might clash brutally at budget time. I don't want this be--so
> directly--"scholarly monographs vs. K-12 textbooks, multimedia
> content, The Great Gatsby and John Grisham novels." Or accurate
> medical and financial information for the elderly! Many academics
> don't understand the extent to which libraries are life-copers, not
> just books, and how this so often happens through face-to-face and
> virtual services--librarians, in other words!--not just the actual
> content.
>
> Yet another advantage of two systems with somewhat different business
> models would be increased diversity of content and more freedom of
> expression. Let's make it as easy as possible to route around the
> censors.
>
> Of course, I want Google, online bookstores and others on the private
> side to keep plugging way. Here's to diversity of biz models, geo
> diversity, racial and ethnic diversity and all other kinds in library
> planning and operation! In a Chronicle of Higher Education essay, I
> tell how different models could exist.
>
> Meanwhile see relevant URLs below, beyond http://www.librarycity.org
>
> David Rothman
> Co-founder, LibraryCity.org
> 703.370.6540
> @librarycity on Twitter
>
>
>
Received on Sun May 22 2011 - 19:25:29 EDT