College & Research Libraries has released "How Institutionalized Are Model License Use Terms: An Analysis of E-journal License Use Rights Clauses from 2000-2009," a preprint by Kristin R. Eschenfelder et al.

Here's an excerpt:

This paper explored the degree to [which] use terms proposed by model licenses have become institutionalized across different publishers' licenses. It examined model license use terms in four areas: downloading, scholarly sharing, interlibrary loan and electronic reserves. Data collection and analysis involved content analysis of 224 electronic journal licenses spanning 2000-2009. Analysis examined how use terms changed over time, differences between consortia and site license use terms and differences between commercial and non-commercial publisher license use terms. Results suggest that some model license use terms have become institutionalized while others have not.

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

COUNTER (Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources) has released the COUNTER Code of Practice for Usage Factors, Draft Release 1.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The Draft Release 1 of the COUNTER Code of Practice for Usage Factors, is one of the most significant outcomes to-date of the Usage Factor project, and is an important part of this, the final Stage of the project, which will take Usage Factor forward to full implementation. This Draft Release 1 is based on well-established COUNTER standards, procedures and protocols; it is designed to enable the recording and reporting by publishers of credible, consistent and compatible global Usage Factors for online publications hosted by them (and incorporating usage of these publications on other platforms that are capable of delivering COUNTER-compliant usage statistics). While Release 1 of this Code of Practice focuses on Usage Factors for journals, it is envisaged that its scope will be extended in subsequent Releases to cover other online publications, such as books and reference works.

| Digital Scholarship's Digital Bibliographies | Digital Scholarship |

NISO has released Making Good on the Promise of ERM: A Standards and Best Practices Discussion Paper.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

"Our standards review and findings focused on five categories: link resolvers and knowledge bases; the work, manifestations, and access points; cost and usage-related data; license terms; and data exchange using institutional identifiers," states Tim Jewell, Director, Information Resources and Scholarly Communications, University of Washington, and Chair of the ERM Data Standards and Best Practices Review Steering Committee. "We did a more extensive review of fourteen of the most relevant standards and mapped the data elements for each to the elements defined in the ERMI report. We also looked at how ERM systems could improve their workflow support-a shortcoming in most existing systems-and we include a detailed workflow best practices bibliography and a list of illustrative workflow diagrams."

"Our final analysis showed that there is value to updating and maintaining a data dictionary that encompasses ERM functions and evolves with technologies and business models," maintains Ivy Anderson, Director of Collections, California Digital Library and member of the ERM Data Standards and Best Practices Review Steering Committee. "However, for practical considerations, we did not recommend that NISO pursue such a project at this time. Instead we identified a number of narrower initiatives targeting specific ERM functional needs and strategies aimed at furthering interoperability."

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

Under a new agreement, LYRASIS will license e-resources for participating ARL libraries.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

On November 18, 2011, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and LYRASIS signed an agreement designating LYRASIS as an agent to negotiate licenses for online content on behalf of interested ARL member libraries. This is the culmination of an effort that began in 2010 to identify a strategy for ARL to influence the marketplace regarding licensing rights, technical specifications, and business terms to meet the needs of research libraries.

This activity has involved task forces, the Reshaping Scholarly Communication Steering Committee, and the ARL Board. The initial task force drafted a white paper outlining the potential areas of action that ARL could take and content that could be considered, and a second task force developed an RFP that went to prospective agents. The Board approved the recommendations, RFP, and agent decision. The license offerings identified for this initiative will not be exclusive to ARL members, but may include libraries with which they have established licensing relationships.

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

The Strategic Content Alliance has released Revenue, Recession, Reliance: Revisiting the SCA/Ithaka S+R Case Studies in Sustainability.

Here's an excerpt:

In 2009, the JISC-led Strategic Content Alliance commissioned Ithaka S+R to investigate the sustainability strategies of twelve digital content projects in the higher education and cultural heritage sectors, located in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Egypt, to see how their leaders were developing cost-management and revenue strategies to foster longterm growth for ongoing digital projects

Two years and one economic crisis later, Ithaka S+R, with the generous support of the JISC-led Strategic Content Alliance, conducted a new round of research and interviews with the leaders of the twelve projects that were the focus of our original case studies. Our goal was to see how their sustainability models had held up, where weaknesses might be starting to show, and what new strategies project leaders were adopting in response. How had budget cuts and other factors affected the projects? What had project leaders learned about making their resources valuable to users? Where did the resources—financial or non-financial—come from to make continued growth and innovation possible? And how could these lessons be useful to others?

The research is documented in updates to the original twelve case studies. The final report, Revenue, Recession, Reliance: Revisiting the SCA / Ithaka Case Studies in Sustainability, provides a summary and analysis of findings across all twelve projects profiled.

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

OCLC Research has released Single Search: The Quest for the Holy Grail .

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

This report highlights successful strategies in providing a single point of access to library, archive and museum collections. . . .

To address this desire, OCLC Research facilitated a working group of nine single search implementers through discussions about the opportunities for, and obstacles to, integrating single search access across an institution. Members of this group told their stories, identified issues, and acknowledged similarities and differences in their approaches. This brief report summarizes those discussions and highlights the emerging practices in providing single search access to an institution's collections. The goal of the report is to foster successful single search implementations by sharing the experience of the working group with those who are just beginning to plan single search implementations

| Digital Scholarship |

Ithaka S+R has released Funding for Sustainability: How Funders' Practices Influence the Future of Digital Resources.

Here's an excerpt:

With support from the JISC-led Strategic Content Alliance, Ithaka S+R conducted a study to examine the ways that both public and private funding bodies in academic and cultural heritage sectors are defining sustainability and encouraging the digital resources they help to create to endure and continue to provide value well beyond the term of the grant. The project explored the funding practices of over 25 funders that support various forms of digital resources, and included over 100 interviews with more than 80 programme officers, foundation directors, project leaders and other experts. Our goal was to gain an understanding of how funders think about the long-term viability of the digital resources they support, and the policies and practices they have put in place to encourage successful outcomes.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 |

A preprint of Lynn Sillipigni Connaway, Timothy J. Dickey, and Marie L. Radford's paper "'If It Is too Inconvenient I'm Not Going after It:' Convenience as a Critical Factor in Information-Seeking Behaviors" is available from OCLC Research.

Here's an excerpt:

In today's fast-paced world, anecdotal evidence suggests that information tends to inundate people, and users of information systems want to find information quickly and conveniently. Empirical evidence for convenience as a critical factor is explored in the data from two multi-year, user study projects funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services. The theoretical framework for this understanding is founded in the concepts of bounded rationality and rational choice theory, with Savolainen's (2006) concept of time as a context in information seeking, as well as gratification theory, informing the emphasis on the seekers' time horizons. Convenience is a situational criterion in peoples' choices and actions during all stages of the information-seeking process. The concept of convenience can include their choice of an information source, their satisfaction with the source and its ease of use, and their time horizon in information seeking. The centrality of convenience is especially prevalent among the younger subjects ("millennials") in both studies, but also holds across all demographic categories—age, gender, academic role, or user or non-user of virtual reference services. These two studies further indicate that convenience is a factor for making choices in a variety of situations, including both academic information seeking and everyday-life information seeking, although it plays different roles in different situations.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Reviews of Digital Scholarship Publications |

The Cornell University Library has adopted a policy of not signing e-resources licenses with nondisclosure clauses.

Here's an excerpt from the policy:

To promote openness and fairness among libraries licensing scholarly resources, Cornell University Library will not enter into vendor contracts that require nondisclosure of pricing information or other information that does not constitute a trade secret. All new and renewed licenses submitted with nondisclosure clauses will not be signed but henceforth will be referred to the Associate University Librarian for Scholarly Resources and Special Collections for further negotiation. . . .

It has become apparent to the library community that the anticompetitive conduct engaged in by some publishing firms is in part a result of the inclusion of nondisclosure agreements in contracts.¹ As Robert Darnton recently noted, by "keeping the terms secret, … one library cannot negotiate for cheaper rates by citing an advantage obtained by another library."² For this reason, the International Coalition of Library Consortia's "Statement of Current Perspective and Preferred Practices for the Selection and Purchase of Electronic Information" states that "Non-disclosure language should not be required for any licensing agreement, particularly language that would preclude library consortia from sharing pricing and other significant terms and conditions with other consortia."³ The more that libraries are able to communicate with one another about vendor offers, the better they are able to weigh the costs and benefits of any individual offer. An open market will result in better licensing terms.

Read more about it at "Cornell U. Library Takes a Stand with Journal Vendors: Prices Will Be Made Public."

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 |

Sarah Rhodes has published "Breaking Down Link Rot: The Chesapeake Project Legal Information Archive's Examination of URL Stability" in LLRX.com.

Here's an excerpt:

In analyzing a single sample of these original URLs at annual intervals, the prevalence of link rot was 8.3% in 2008, within zero to twelve months of the content being harvested. One year later, twelve to twenty-four months after the content was harvested, link rot in the same sample was found to have jumped to 14.3%. In the most recent analysis, in 2010, link rot was found to be 27.9%. In other words, link rot increased from about one in every twelve archived titles in 2008, to one in every seven titles in 2009, and finally to about one in every 3.5 titles in 2010.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Reviews of Digital Scholarship Publications |

RIN and the Scottish Confederation of University and Research Libraries (SCURL) have released One Year On: Evaluating the Initial Impact of the Scottish Higher Education Digital Library (SHEDL).

Here's an excerpt:

SHEDL was formally established as a ‘bloc’ purchaser for the nineteen Scottish HEIs by SCURL, the Scottish Confederation of University & Research Libraries, in 2008. Its first three licences, comprising over 1,500 online journals published by the American Chemical Society, Cambridge University Press and Springer, came into effect in January 2009.

This report presents the findings of an evaluation of changes to usage and cost-per-use since SHEDL was established. This report cannot show long-term trends, since it covers only the first year of SHEDL’s existence. Nevertheless, it provides an overview of the initial changes that have followed the introduction of the three SHEDL licences.

| Digital Scholarship |

ARL has released Evaluating E-Resources, SPEC Kit 316 .

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) has published Evaluating E-resources, SPEC Kit 316, which re-examines the ways in which ARL member libraries have (re)structured themselves to identify the availability of new e-resources in the market; evaluate them as candidates for acquisition; decide to acquire/purchase the e-resources; evaluate them prior to their renewal to determine their continued utility; and publicize or market the new e-resources. Nearly identical questions were posed regarding purchases/licensing by consortia and by individual libraries, enabling comparisons in process to be made.

By the March deadline, responses had been submitted by 73 of the 124 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 59%. The survey results indicated that both consortia and libraries deploy large amounts of staff resources to build e-resource collections and that identification and assessment activities are conducted as communal activities among consortia staff and librarians from across the organization.

There is a strong and somewhat surprising correlation between the ways in which research libraries use consortia to acquire and evaluate e-resources and the ways in which they directly acquire and evaluate e-resources. There is also a strong correlation in the ways in which these libraries are acquiring and evaluating highly specialized and multidisciplinary e-resources. Yet, despite considerable and widespread involvement of staff, the survey uncovered weaknesses in the procurement processes, policies, and procedures. These shortcomings not only open the potential for wasted staff time and poor decision making, they also carry potential legal ramifications, due to the nature of contractual licensing. The findings of the survey should be considered a call for concerted communication, organization, and action among those responsible for the acquisition and assessment of e-resources in ARL libraries.

This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of e-resource selection policies, e-resource request and evaluation procedures, descriptions of library and consortia e-resource selectors, job descriptions, and promotional methods.

The table of contents and executive summary from this SPEC Kit are available online at http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/spec-316-web.pdf.