 |
 |
Roger
I am guessing that you are referring to
the use limitation put on ‘purchased’ / ’perpetually owned’
e-books by some aggregators/suppliers. Typically a figure of around 450 uses is
applied (except in the infamous case of Harper Collins where the number was 26)
– this means that you ‘own’ the book for 450 uses, and if you
think your users will need more accesses in any one year, you are supposed to
buy two copies. If your usage reaches the magic figure, you will loose the book
from your collection – possibly at a critical point for users or at a
point when you have no spare budget to purchase an additional copy.
I have always ridiculed this use of language
– ‘purchased’ / ‘owned’.
Publishers and aggregators working with
libraries really need to come to terms with two issues:
1. e-Books are no different from books
except in the medium used to convey the content
To say otherwise is no different to saying
that books printed on coloured paper cannot be loaned out by a library! DRM can
surely be used to limit the length of the e-book loan and to prevent copying
between devices – in essence the publisher will have more control than it
has over a printed book that can be photocopied endlessly (if illegally).
2. Libraries exist around the concept of
lending books and guaranteeing availability of books
Publishers and libraries really need to
work together to resolve the ways that e-books can be purchased and used by
libraries. Over at LIS-E-BOOKS public librarians are discussing the setting up of
an e-books group under the banner of the SCL Digital Group and the first proposed
agenda item is to look at e-book lending service models.
Perhaps academic librarians need a similar
debate.
Chris
______________________________
Information Automation Limited
t. (+44) 1974 251302
s. chrisatial (Skype,
pre-arranged)
e. [log in to unmask]
w. www.i-a-l.co.uk
b: http://i-a-l.blogspot.com/
____________________________________________
Registered address:
Penbryn, Bronant, Aberystwyth SY23 4TJ
Registered in England
Number: 2110002
-----Original Message-----
From: Library and Information
Professionals [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roger Farbey
Sent: 10 October 2011 08:43
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: eBooks probs
Hi Emma
Not sure what you are referring to (you don’t actually state which
company you work for or what consortium you represent) but this is our
position.
1.
We don’t subscribe to eBooks
through a consortium.
2.
We don’t have any Pearson titles
as eBooks.
3.
The original matter I referred to was not
related to concurrency of use.
4.
This has only happened twice and was
corrected quite quickly by the reseller.
5.
We have only been purchasing eBooks for
about a year and have <100 titles. Actually <70!
6.
My criticism refers not to the
occurrence of transient loss of these titles but to the fact that such a
transient loss will always remain a possibility,
“in perpetuity” .
7.
We don’t seem to suffer transient
loss of any of our paper-based books (unless of course they are nicked).
8.
Yes, I am a luddite
9.
No, I don’t have a Kindle.
10.
I do however have a smart phone so maybe
I’m not such a Luddite.
Best wishes
Roger
Roger Farbey
Head of Library & Knowledge Services
British Dental Association
64 Wimpole Street
London
W1G 8YS
Tel: 020 7563 4193
From: Library and
Information Professionals [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chen, Emma
Sent: 07 October 2011 22:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: FW: eBooks probs
Dear
Roger,
Thank
you for your email. Please find information below.
Good afternoon
I just want to ensure that the library is aware of the following
communication that was sent to the consortia head’s regarding the
enforced concurrency by Pearson’s and its affiliates.
Although,
as a matter of rule, MyiLibrary does not automatically enforce turnaways in
order to limit the number of concurrent users, we do monitor very closely the
concurrent usage of titles of all our customers.
Publishers
are now reviewing this practise; As a consequence, Pearson and Irwin Law have
advised us that our systems now need to comply with concurrency rules for
single and multi user access moving forward. Should customers wish to
review the licensing for increased user access, please refer to us and we would
be happy to quote on a case by case basis.”
Should any of your titles be
affected by enforced concurrency your end user will see the following message
Please let me know if you would like me to send you a list of Pearson
titles that are in your collection
Kind regards
Emma
From: Library and
Information Professionals [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roger Farbey
Sent: 04 October 2011 11:15
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: eBooks probs
Without actually naming any names (yet) I wonder if any other libraries
apart from us are experiencing sporadic loss of eBook availability which they
have *purchased* and I stress that word because this is beginning to get me
really cross. Obviously we report these occasional losses to the supplier who
usually corrects the technical problem quickly, but should this be happening as
often it is the reader who discovers this first. So much for eBooks being
purchased "in perpetuity". I hope this is not going to be a trend,
but I fear otherwise.
Roger
Roger Farbey
Head of Library & Knowledge Services
British Dental Association
64 Wimpole Street
London
W1G 8YS
Tel: 020 7563 4193
www.bda.org
Consider the environment before printing this e-mail! Save paper by printing
only if absolutely necessary
This email may contain
confidential information and may be protected by law as a legally privileged
document and copyright work. Neither its content, nor the name of the
addressee, should be disclosed and it should not be given or copied to anyone
other than the person(s) named or referenced above. If you have received this
email in error please contact the sender.
This email may contain
confidential information and may be protected by law as a legally privileged
document and copyright work. Neither its content, nor the name of the
addressee, should be disclosed and it should not be given or copied to anyone
other than the person(s) named or referenced above. If you have received this
email in error please contact the sender.