Re: Electronic libraries (Was: Re: copyright expiration ...)

On 18 Sep 1998, Timothy Arnold-Moore <tja[_at_]mds.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
>
> A stable and reliable revenue collection and distribution scheme
> is what is needed to secure the investments made by authors and
> entrepenurial sponsors. Current copyright law has supported the
> development of revenue collection and distribution schemes for
> paper-based publishing but I remain to be convinced that a widely
> used electronic solution is possible without some sort of compulsary
> licence.

Recalling the first decade after the introduction of the first plain-paper copier, the Xerox model 914, the publishers of research journals that I knew had little problem with researchers making copies of articles from journals in, or circulated by, their libraries. It seems to me that if universities had not abused the advantage given by "library photocopying" in the Copyright Act of 1976 -- cancelling thousands of subscriptions, reducing purchases of monographs, falsely accusing publishers of profiteering, and researchers of excess publishing -- we would not be worrying about the need for a new economic basis for free distribution of learned communications.

I believe that universities that promote research should maintain libraries that meet standards of excellence and, in doing so, provide an economic market for investment. They did so for hundreds of years. In fact, Vannevar Bush, in his famous outline of the university-government research partnership, asserted that universities, "are charged with the responsibility of conserving the knowledge accumulated by the past." Research overhead ($5 billion) paid by government agencies is supposed to help. It doesn't. Library collections have been decimated by inadequate financial support. Why? Ask university administrators.

I think the universities -- not the publishers or authors -- are the enemies of your vision. The recent proposals by Koonin and Bachrach et al. seek to further dilute copyright protection and ultimately to eliminate the cost of libraries. Publishing without publishers, in their view, would become financed by authors; the power of independent investment to single out works of merit would evaporate. Reform must work in the opposite direction to achieve ideal dissemination and application of research findings.

Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY <70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com> Received on Tue Sep 22 1998 - 21:37:35 GMT