Date: Mon 17 Mar 2019
This week we start our two week coverage on licensing issues, and this is because licensing is at the top of the list of most important aspects of electronic resource management.
The readings are pretty straightforward, but let's preview some of the basics, which are nicely outlined in Weir (2016) (not in the reading):
As an example, the California Digital Library, via the University of California, provides a checklist and a copy of their standard license agreement.
The checklist covers four main sections and is well worth a read:
We also have three additional readings this week. One of the readings covers SERU: A Shared Electronic Resource Understanding, by NISO. We also have a short article by Regan that provides some guidelines on becoming competent on licensing.
SERU, Shared Electronic Resource Understanding, is another NISO collaborative document that helps standardize some aspects of the licensing process and also can be used as "an alternative to a license agreement" if a provider and a library agrees to its use. Like the standard licensing structure that Weir (2016) outlines, SERU also includes parts that describe use, inappropriate use, access, and more, but also posits other stipulations, such as confidentiality and privacy.
The other reading is the NASIG Core Competencies for Electronic Resources Librarians. This doesn't specifically cover licensing, but I added it to this week's reading list for a couple of reasons. First, it's a reminder that when we talk about electronic resource management, we talk about a comprehensive list of responsibilities, skills, technologies, and more, and I need to keep reminding you of this. Second, because the Regan reading specifically mentions these competencies, and I thought it would good to introduce them here, even though many of you have already commented on them in previous discussion forums.
This week, after reading the material, I want you to focus on the Regan article and some of the questions raised there. Regan raises important questions about the licensing process and about effective communication and advocacy. This week, I want you to comment on these things, and I want you to answer some of the questions that Regan raises. You can do that by searching the web and library websites. In fact, at the beginning of the semester I asked you to subscribe to the SERIALST email list. It's now time to draw upon that and any discussions you've seen in those lists that are related. You can usually search the archives of those lists, if you want. Regan also mentions some other sources, such as LIBLICENSE and copyrightlaws.com. Any of these are fair game for discussing, but the latter is a commercial entity that provides material and tutorials for a kind of tuition. It might be useful to know about but explore only if you want. However, LIBLICENSE provides model licenses as well as links to additional model licences, including the above mentioned California Digital Library Standard License Agreement. The LIBLICENSE model license includes even more details, such as types of authorized uses, and the new ones include:
Regan, S. (2015). Lassoing the Licensing Beast: How Electronic Resources Librarians Can Build Competency and Advocate for Wrangling Electronic Content Licensing. The Serials Librarian, 68(1–4), 318–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2015.1026225
Weir, R. O. (2012). Licensing Electronic Resources and Contract Negotiation. In R. O. Weir (Ed.), Managing electronic resources: a LITA guide. Chicago: ALA TechSource, an imprint of the American Library Association.