Martin Phillips raises an important point when he says that 'with shorter
print runs, groups may not wish to part with copies for all six legal
deposit libraries'. There is definitely a feeling among some local history
groups that the requirement to part with six copies of their publications
is excessive, and more of a financial burden than they can support. For
many small societies, their publications are one of the few ways in which
they can raise funds, and to lose the revenue on 6 copies can make a great
difference to them.
It may possibly be that the low percentage of publications deposited is
due not only to lack of knowledge of the requirement, but also to
unwillingness to be involved in what is perceived as an unreasonable
procedure.
It would make a lot of sense from their point of view to be able to
place one copy of their publications either in their own local public
library, or in one of the six deposit libraries. Whatever system is
considered, it needs to be simple: trying to keep track of who has put
what where has all the makings of a major administrative headache.
Margaret Blackburn
Special Collections Cataloguing
University of London Library
Senate House, Malet Street,
London WC1E 7HU
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|