Introducing the ReadersFirst Library License Standards Project
/On behalf of the ReadersFirst Working Group, of which I am honored to belong, I introduce a proposal to the big publishers suggest what library digital content terms might be fair.
We ask to engage the Big 5. Many Indie and even medium sized publishers already give fair, even excellent terms. You, we ask to continue to work with us as yo already do. We at RF encourage all libraries to acquire and promote works from these, our partners in reading.
Rather than comment at length on the RF proposals here, I point readers to an article in Words & Money for an introduction to the papers : Librarians Want the Big Five Publishers to Negotiate ‘Fair’ Digital License Terms with Libraries. He…
Sorry you have to look at a photo of me!
Please visit our position papers for a deep dive into the proposals: https://www.readersfirst.org/position-papers
There are three papers, but the article concentrates only on the first.
Digital Library Book License Standards: for digital collection librarians, an outline of sustainable license terms
Implementing the Standards: for selectors, how one consortium uses the standards in OverDrive Marketplace
Publishing Stakeholder Companion: for distributors and publishers, information to contextualize the standards and invite mutually beneficial conversation about digital licenses
The idea is to start a conversation to get better terms for library digital content.
No doubt some in libraries will think our group's proposed terms too favorable to publishers. But based on what we pay for print, and thus what has seemed "fair" over the years, I think we are suggesting something librarians could live with and the publishers can't say is unreasonable. It would double the number of digital titles we could get and prevent having to get the same title over and over. The proposal may seem a compromise. It will not perfectly appeal to anybody. I doubt a set of terms can be developed that would suit every library. But isn’t this the reason for compromise?
I have not received, and don't expect to receive, comment from any of the Big 5 publishers. They tend remain silent as libraries ask for fair terms. Perhaps they will think about the proposal. I hope so. With ebook legislation passing, it seems a good idea at least to start talking about what might be "reasonable." If we could get even one to talk, and, I hope, act, we will be making progress.
Thank you to all the members of our working group, and especially to Carmi Parker, for all the work that went into developing this proposal.
It could well be that only action, legislative or otherwise, will force the big publishers to change. But they can't say we in libraries aren't willing to talk, offering terms that are, we think, in line with what we get with print and that have been fair to publishers, authors, and library readers for centuries. Digital has changed the ways some of us get books, but these are still books. And in a time when reading books as a parttime hardly seems on increase, and organized political forces try to limit what we read, we all have a sake in promoting books.