Hi Jenifer,
I agree totally and share your outrage. I only wish I'd got more time to
look into this whole issue rather than come across them on a case by case
basis.
We've had several discussions on this list over the years about rolling
walls. In some of the earliest cases publishers such as ACS and SAGE dropped
their rolling wall policy and moved to the more acceptable fixed wall
policy. However, it seems that recently some publishers have decided to or
are thinking about introducing the rolling wall into their subscription
models.
The most recent discussion on this list relates to INFORMS where subscribers
suddenly found that they lost access to content that they had previously had
access to and without any warning. Several of us have lobbied INFORMS - some
privately and some in public - to try and get them to change their mind.
INFORMS said that they'd had a moving wall for years, but having scoured
their web site I couldn't find anywhere that spelt it out (I haven't looked
recently so they may have updated their site). In the case of INFORMS we had
to suddenly change our decision to go online only from 2007 and move back to
print/online. However, we have still suffered a loss of access since the
journals moved onto their new site and this access has never been restored.
INFORMS did welcome the input to this list on their policy, but some of us
still aren't convinced that they fully understand our position.
In these and other cases it seems that the rolling wall policy is being
adopted in parallel with the digitization and sale of the backfiles.
Personally I am unhappy at being forced to purchase backfiles just in order
to not end up with holes in our journal holdings for particular titles. The
decision to purchase backfile(s) should not have to be made on the basis of
losing access to material in the frontfiles.
We’ve another example with the American Speech-Language Hearing Association
who I think have a moving wall policy associated with the purchase of the
backfile. Again we were told that "this was what librarians wanted".
Many publishers are saying that this is popular with librarians, but many of
us are wondering which librarians publishers are talking to. I have yet to
meet or hear from a librarian who supports the rolling wall.
I have several times tried to lobby publishers to change their mind on such
issues, but such lobbying can take a large amount of time and effort.
What do other librarians on this list think about the rolling wall issue?
Where are the librarians who publishers keep telling us about who want these
rolling walls? If you're out there we would like to hear from you as well.
Cheers
Lesley
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lesley Crawshaw, Faculty Information Consultant,
Learning and Information Services
University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
email: [log in to unmask]
phone: 01707 284662 fax: 01707 284666
list owner: [log in to unmask]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-----Original Message-----
From: An informal open list set up by the UK Serials Group
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Holman Jenifer S
Sent: 02 May 2007 17:13
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Rolling access to electronic subscriptions
Also posted to eril-l (apologies to those who receive both).....
If there were one reason why we must continue print subscriptions it
would be this:
Some publishers (American Fisheries Society, International Reading
Association) offer an electronic only subscription that rolls. That's
right, it rolls. Even if you continue your subscription, you lose
access to that 5th year. In the case of Reading Teacher, the policy is
even worse, access rolls at the beginning of each new volume, giving
users access to just one issue at certain points in the year.
Individual subscribers (who pay half the subscription fee by the way)
have access to the entire archives.
What's even worse, American Fisheries Society's institutional access
policy (http://www.fisheries.org/afs/publications_libraryterms.html)
indicates that:
Permanent access to AFS online journals is not available in years when a
subscribing institution does not renew a subscription. However, a
subscriber may download and (if appropriate) print out one archival copy
of the purchased volume. Normal "fair use" privileges accrue to archival
copies. Moreover, a subscribing institution has access to the entire
historical journal database even for years in which it had not
subscribed.
EBSCO assures us, however, that this is really not the case and that the
access truly is rolling. I'm still trying to actually get someone at
American Fisheries to speak to me.
Are there other publishers expecting libraries to accept this situation?
Are you as outraged as I am? When Sports Illustrated failed to deliver
the swimsuit issue hundreds of irate librarians called SI and emailed
listservs, calling for action. I'm pretty sure that SI will not leave
libraries out the loop next year.
Where is our outrage with society publishers? Has anyone successfully
lobbied to get these rolling terms changed?
Until the situation improves, we will continue to need print
subscriptions.
Jenifer Holman
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jenifer Holman
Acquisitions Librarian
Murphy Library
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
1631 Pine St.
La Crosse, WI 54601
phone: 608-785-8395
fax: 608-785-8639
email: [log in to unmask]
http://www.uwlax.edu/murphylibrary/
<http://www.uwlax.edu/murphylibrary/>
|
