Archive for the 'Licenses' Category

"National Licenses and Open Access in Germany"

Posted in Licenses, Open Access on June 11th, 2012

The Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) has released "National Licenses and Open Access in Germany."

Here's an excerpt:

Over the last years, a number of collaborative negotiations have taken place at a national level in order to push forward on conditions for Open Access within journal license agreements. In 2010, the National Licensing working group of the "Digital Information" initiative in Germany agreed on common guidelines and carried out licensing negotiations for current journals and databases. Special attention was paid to pricing models, archiving and "moving wall" conditions, including a condition for Open Access. The background to and outcomes of these negotiations are described in this paper, with particular emphasis on newly agreed licenses in the Alliance of German Science Organisations framework ("Alliance licenses"). Further contracts are under development.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography: "This work gives an outstanding overview of scholarship relating to the growing Open Access movement." — George Machovec, The Charleston Advisor 12, no. 2 (2010): 3. | Digital Scholarship |

Be Sociable, Share!

    "How Institutionalized Are Model License Use Terms: An Analysis of E-journal License Use Rights Clauses from 2000-2009"

    Posted in Copyright, Electronic Resources, Licenses on April 17th, 2012

    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 |

    Be Sociable, Share!

      LYRASIS to License E-resources for ARL Libraries

      Posted in ARL Libraries, Electronic Resources, Licenses on November 29th, 2011

      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 |

      Be Sociable, Share!

        A Canadian Museum’s Guide to Developing a Digital Licensing Agreement Strategy

        Posted in Copyright, Licenses, Museums on May 11th, 2011

        The Canadian Heritage Information Network has released A Canadian Museum's Guide to Developing a Digital Licensing Agreement Strategy.

        Here's an excerpt:

        This book was written to provide information, from the unique perspective of Canadian museums, on how to develop a digital licensing agreement strategy. This second edition continues along this stream to provide a unique Canadian perspective as museums dive into the global scene of licensing their content. I hope to inform you about legal rights and obligations in licence agreements, creating your licensing agreement strategy, negotiating the best licences to meet your needs, lowering your legal liability when licensing and sharing content, and the variety of licensing arrangements which may be used.

        | Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Digital Curation and Preservation Bibliography 2010 |

        Be Sociable, Share!

          Digitisation Audiovisual Materials Heritage Institutions: Models for Licenses and Compensations

          Posted in Copyright, Digitization, Licenses on May 11th, 2011

          Images for the Future has released Digitisation Audiovisual Materials Heritage Institutions: Models for Licenses and Compensations (English summary).

          Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

          While digitising for preservation purposes has been permitted since 2004 under strict conditions in accordance with Art. 16n of the Dutch Copyright Act, for the reutilisation of digitized material (e.g. on websites or by means of retransmission by radio or television) permission must be sought and obtained from large numbers of rights holders. For large digitisation projects, such as Beelden voor de Toekomst (Images for the Future), this means a rights clearance operation of dizzying proportions. In addition, digitisation projects face great uncertainty with regard to the level of the copyright license fees due. Given this background the Images for the Future consortium has commissioned the Institute for Information Law (hereinafter IViR) to investigate models for licenses and fees for mass digitisation projects.

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

          Be Sociable, Share!

            Cornell University Library Will Not Sign E-Resources Licenses with Nondisclosure Clauses

            Posted in ARL Libraries, Copyright, Electronic Resources, Licenses on March 22nd, 2011

            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 |

            Be Sociable, Share!

              One Year On: Evaluating the Initial Impact of the Scottish Higher Education Digital Library (SHEDL)

              Posted in Electronic Resources, Licenses, Reports and White Papers on October 19th, 2010

              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 |

              Be Sociable, Share!

                First-Sale Doctrine and Resale of Software: Vernor v. Autodesk Ruling

                Posted in Copyright, Licenses on September 13th, 2010

                A ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the Vernor v. Autodesk case has put into question the right to resell software.

                Here's an excerpt from Sherwin Siy's "Software Companies Own Your Hard Drive: Ninth Circuit Rules for Formality Over Function":

                In Vernor v. Autodesk, the appeals court held that Autodesk could stop Vernor from selling copies of their software on eBay by claiming that those resales were an infringement of its copyrights. Ordinarily, a copyright holder can't prevent someone from selling or otherwise distributing a lawfully made copy of the work, so long as that person owns the copy. Here, Autodesk argued that Vernor never owned the copies (which he bought used from a design firm) because Autodesk included in its sale to that firm a standardized agreement that said that the firm was only "licensing" the disks. . . .

                So what does this decision mean? Unchecked, it won't soon lead to a world where I can't donate my old T-shirts to Goodwill, or where PK can start raking in that sweet, sweet statutory damages cash. Those might be theoretical possibilities, but the first effects will likely be something we've already been seeing creeping at the margins. Say goodbye to used software and used games, for instance. That PC version of Bioshock 4 you might buy a few years from now? Don't expect to be able to sell it once you're done with it. Don't even expect to be able to give it away. Game rental services could get litigated out of existence. And while licensing clothing might be beyond the pale, it's not too hard to see the software model being applied to increasingly sold-by-the-bit media like movies and music. All because of fine print, which might be clear and convenient for a court, even if it's exactly the opposite for a consumer.

                Be Sociable, Share!

                  Page 3 of 712345...Last »

                  DigitalKoans

                  DigitalKoans

                  Digital Scholarship

                  Copyright © 2005-2013 by Charles W. Bailey, Jr.

                  Creative Commons License

                  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.