ARL, CNI, SPARC

it seems odd to give away our own public domain works to those same institutions that are profiting from us. In the end, however, I assume that most libraries will focus on their mission to support scholarly communication, and will adopt policies similar to ours. © 2009 Peter Hirtle This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/. To cite this article: Peter Hirtle, “Removing All Restrictions: Cornell’s New Policy on Use of Public Domain Reproductions.” Research Library Issues: A Bimonthly Report from ARL, CNI, and SPARC, no. 266 (October 2009): 1–6. http://www.arl.org/resources/pubs/rli/archive/rli266.shtml. RLI 266 6 Removing All Restrictions: Cornell’s New Policy on Use of Public Domain Reproductions ( C O N T I N U E D ) OCTOBER 2009 RESEARCH LIBRARY ISSUES: A BIMONTHLY REPORT FROM ARL, CNI, AND SPARC

Previous Page Next Page

Research Library Issues, no. 266 (Oct. 2009) resources

Extracted Text (may have errors)

it seems odd to give away our own public domain works to those same institutions that are profiting from us. In the end, however, I assume that most libraries will focus on their mission to support scholarly communication, and will adopt policies similar to ours. © 2009 Peter Hirtle This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/. To cite this article: Peter Hirtle, “Removing All Restrictions: Cornell’s New Policy on Use of Public Domain Reproductions.” Research Library Issues: A Bimonthly Report from ARL, CNI, and SPARC, no. 266 (October 2009): 1–6. http://www.arl.org/resources/pubs/rli/archive/rli266.shtml. RLI 266 6 Removing All Restrictions: Cornell’s New Policy on Use of Public Domain Reproductions ( C O N T I N U E D ) OCTOBER 2009 RESEARCH LIBRARY ISSUES: A BIMONTHLY REPORT FROM ARL, CNI, AND SPARC

Help

Evolving Preservation Roles and Responsibilities of Research Libraries Digitization and Preservation Q: Most libraries digitize ad hoc…however, most libraries also consider “digitization” the end to preservation. How do we educate and implement programs of digital migration to further preserve digital surrogates, and also insist on the physical preservation of original rare antiquity in libraries? Should we preserve both for the long run? Jim Neal: Digitization is not preservation. There is a complex set of provisions and investments for infrastructure and migration that need to be enabled to guarantee RLI 266 7 OCTOBER 2009 RESEARCH LIBRARY ISSUES: A BIMONTHLY REPORT FROM ARL, CNI, AND SPARC Introductory Note On September 15, ARL held a Webcast, “Preservation: Evolving Roles and Responsibilities of Research Libraries.” The Webcast featured presentations by: • Lars Meyer, Sr. Director, Content Division, Emory University Libraries and ARL Visiting Program Officer • James Neal, Vice President for Information Services and University Librarian, Columbia University Libraries • Deborah Jakubs, Rita DiGiallonardo Holloway University Librarian and Vice Provost for Library Affairs, Duke University Libraries The Webcast was grounded in the recently released report, Safeguarding Collections at the Dawn of the 21st Century: Describing Roles & Measuring Contemporary Preservation Activities in ARL Libraries, prepared for ARL by Lars Meyer. Meyer’s report, released in May 2009, documents the trend within research libraries of broadening preservation activities to address digital content, and the drive to develop collaborative approaches to providing preservation functions. In addition to the speaker presentations, the broadcast included substantial time for live question-and- answer exchanges. What appears below is a sampling of audience questions that could not be accommodated on air, along with brief responses from the speakers. To view the original Webcast archive, the complete Q&A exchanges, as well as speaker information and additional resources, please visit http://www.arl.org/preserv/preservationwebcast/index.shtml.

Previous Page Next Page

Research Library Issues, no. 266 (Oct. 2009) resources

Extracted Text (may have errors)

Evolving Preservation Roles and Responsibilities of Research Libraries Digitization and Preservation Q: Most libraries digitize ad hoc…however, most libraries also consider “digitization” the end to preservation. How do we educate and implement programs of digital migration to further preserve digital surrogates, and also insist on the physical preservation of original rare antiquity in libraries? Should we preserve both for the long run? Jim Neal: Digitization is not preservation. There is a complex set of provisions and investments for infrastructure and migration that need to be enabled to guarantee RLI 266 7 OCTOBER 2009 RESEARCH LIBRARY ISSUES: A BIMONTHLY REPORT FROM ARL, CNI, AND SPARC Introductory Note On September 15, ARL held a Webcast, “Preservation: Evolving Roles and Responsibilities of Research Libraries.” The Webcast featured presentations by: • Lars Meyer, Sr. Director, Content Division, Emory University Libraries and ARL Visiting Program Officer • James Neal, Vice President for Information Services and University Librarian, Columbia University Libraries • Deborah Jakubs, Rita DiGiallonardo Holloway University Librarian and Vice Provost for Library Affairs, Duke University Libraries The Webcast was grounded in the recently released report, Safeguarding Collections at the Dawn of the 21st Century: Describing Roles & Measuring Contemporary Preservation Activities in ARL Libraries, prepared for ARL by Lars Meyer. Meyer’s report, released in May 2009, documents the trend within research libraries of broadening preservation activities to address digital content, and the drive to develop collaborative approaches to providing preservation functions. In addition to the speaker presentations, the broadcast included substantial time for live question-and- answer exchanges. What appears below is a sampling of audience questions that could not be accommodated on air, along with brief responses from the speakers. To view the original Webcast archive, the complete Q&A exchanges, as well as speaker information and additional resources, please visit http://www.arl.org/preserv/preservationwebcast/index.shtml.

What are the concerns associated with the “free use” model? The downside to this approach is that nothing can stop someone from taking the PDFs or other versions of Cornell books from the Internet Archive and producing their own print-on-demand or electronic versions for sale. Of the three options identified, why did Cornell adopt Option 3? The benefit to scholarship, research, and learning from having free access to public domain books is considerable. Making this material free is consistent with the University’s mission to promote a culture of broad inquiry, as well as our library’s commitment to making information free and disseminating knowledge as widely as possible. In addition, revenues from the permission process may not even have outweighed the costs associated with managing permissions. And as we have already discussed, there are legal, technical, and ethical issues with the other options. Lastly, it would be ironic if, at the same time the library was advocating open and free access to the copyrighted works of faculty members, it also was restricting use of its digital files of public domain books. Do the new guidelines only apply to digital files? No. It would not make sense to charge permission fees for the use of reproductions made from physical public domain items found in the library if we are not charging permission for items that have already been digitized. We do, however, continue to charge for reprographic services. Do you see other libraries adopting this sort of policy in the future? I would assume so, for the same reasons that led Cornell to this position. There are reasonable forces working against others following our lead, however. First, there is the desire to control the use of “my materials” in order to ensure that they are treated with respect. In addition, there is the allure of what appears to be an easy revenue source. We are having to license access to public domain works found in other libraries that have partnered with commercial ventures RLI 266 5 Removing All Restrictions: Cornell’s New Policy on Use of Public Domain Reproductions ( C O N T I N U E D ) OCTOBER 2009 RESEARCH LIBRARY ISSUES: A BIMONTHLY REPORT FROM ARL, CNI, AND SPARC Making this material free is consistent with the University’s mission to promote a culture of broad inquiry, as well as our library’s commitment to making information free and disseminating knowledge as widely as possible.

Previous Page Next Page

Research Library Issues, no. 266 (Oct. 2009) resources

All section downloads (PDF) click to expand contents

Extracted Text (may have errors)

Help

loading

Research Library Issues, no. 266 (Oct. 2009) resources

Extracted Text (may have errors)

Research Library Issues, no. 266 (Oct. 2009) resources