[Eril-l] FW: charge for provision of purchased PQ HNP archive

[Steve Oberg]

I agree that this is an important issue, which is why I raised it here. I also agree (and suspect) that the original license language might have been vague and didn’t address this issue directly or clearly. I may not be correct in this but what I wonder is whether ProQuest agreed to the ownership principle by including that option in its license at the request of libraries, charged a lot extra for it upfront, but did not plan for libraries to take them up on that right. Well, we are now, and they seem ill-prepared for it.

I understand that things change and there are real costs to providing the data. What I do not understand is lack of clear or consistent communication from a vendor about that reality up front, as those costs become clear and new delivery mechanisms are established.

Our interest in having a local copy of this archive comes from a digital humanities perspective rather than a preservation one, or a desire to “roll our own” in terms of an end user interface. We are current subscribers to the resource.

In talking with a variety of people offlist, I’ve learned a lot. For example, one of ProQuest’s main competitors seems to do a much better job of handling archival access for libraries.

Steve

Steve Oberg<http://www.wheaton.edu/Academics/Faculty/O/Steve-Oberg>
Assistant Professor of Library Science
Electronic Resources and Serials
Wheaton College (IL)
+1 (630) 752-5852

NASIG Executive Board Member-At-Large
[NASIG - http://www.nasig.org]

From: "Thomas, William Joseph" <THOMASW at ecu.edu<mailto:THOMASW at ecu.edu>>
Date: Thursday, March 10, 2016 at 1:52 PM
To: Steve Oberg <steve.oberg at wheaton.edu<mailto:steve.oberg at wheaton.edu>>, eril-l <eril-l at lists.eril-l.org<mailto:eril-l at lists.eril-l.org>>
Subject: RE: [Eril-l] FW: charge for provision of purchased PQ HNP archive

This is an important development in archival collections that are distributed by others—enough time has passed that more and more colleges and universities will want to have access to the content in the absence of current subscriptions. Many of us have licenses that only vaguely address future delivery of content or access to content; overall I think that’s necessary because we cannot predict the delivery mechanisms or cost.
HOWEVER, I do believe that it’s in the best interests of both libraries and providers that access costs be negotiable and kept as low as possible. After all, if my library has to face access costs that we cannot afford, why bother investing in new archival purchases?

Wm. Joseph Thomas
252-737-2728
thomasw at ecu.edu<mailto:thomasw at ecu.edu>
[orcid_16x16]http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3503-6615


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.eril-l.org/pipermail/eril-l-eril-l.org/attachments/20160312/50a3dbe5/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 6D3DC0EF-EFE9-4F5D-B30A-356B5C4A3B0A.png
Type: image/png
Size: 17489 bytes
Desc: 6D3DC0EF-EFE9-4F5D-B30A-356B5C4A3B0A.png
URL: <http://lists.eril-l.org/pipermail/eril-l-eril-l.org/attachments/20160312/50a3dbe5/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1221 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <http://lists.eril-l.org/pipermail/eril-l-eril-l.org/attachments/20160312/50a3dbe5/attachment-0001.gif>