Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries De Montfort Universitys experience
Identifieur interne : 000E18 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000E17; suivant : 000E19Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries De Montfort Universitys experience
Auteurs : Mel Collier ; Anne Ramsden ; Dian ZhaoSource :
- OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives [ 1065-075X ] ; 1996-09-01.
Abstract
Contends that networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries give rise to a number of significant issues, notably copyright and how to set a price which will give the publisher a reasonable return on investment and will be regarded by libraries as a fair and realistic scheme. Describes the experience of one university which has been carrying out extensive electronic library work over the last three years and draws conclusions which could have relevance at the national level.
Url:
DOI: 10.1108/10650759610129585
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004BLe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries De Montfort Universitys experience</title><author><name sortKey="Collier, Mel" sort="Collier, Mel" uniqKey="Collier M" first="Mel" last="Collier">Mel Collier</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Head of Division, Learning Development, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Ramsden, Anne" sort="Ramsden, Anne" uniqKey="Ramsden A" first="Anne" last="Ramsden">Anne Ramsden</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Project Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Zhao, Dian" sort="Zhao, Dian" uniqKey="Zhao D" first="Dian" last="Zhao">Dian Zhao</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Technical Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B</idno><date when="1996" year="1996">1996</date><idno type="doi">10.1108/10650759610129585</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000E18</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries De Montfort Universitys experience</title><author><name sortKey="Collier, Mel" sort="Collier, Mel" uniqKey="Collier M" first="Mel" last="Collier">Mel Collier</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Head of Division, Learning Development, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Ramsden, Anne" sort="Ramsden, Anne" uniqKey="Ramsden A" first="Anne" last="Ramsden">Anne Ramsden</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Project Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Zhao, Dian" sort="Zhao, Dian" uniqKey="Zhao D" first="Dian" last="Zhao">Dian Zhao</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Technical Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives</title><idno type="ISSN">1065-075X</idno><imprint><publisher>MCB UP Ltd</publisher><date type="published" when="1996-09-01">1996-09-01</date><biblScope unit="volume">12</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">3</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="18">18</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="28">28</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">1065-075X</idno></series><idno type="istex">0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1108/10650759610129585</idno><idno type="filenameID">1640120303</idno><idno type="original-pdf">1640120303.pdf</idno><idno type="href">10650759610129585.pdf</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1065-075X</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Contends that networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries give rise to a number of significant issues, notably copyright and how to set a price which will give the publisher a reasonable return on investment and will be regarded by libraries as a fair and realistic scheme. Describes the experience of one university which has been carrying out extensive electronic library work over the last three years and draws conclusions which could have relevance at the national level.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>emerald</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Mel Collier</name><affiliations><json:string>Head of Division, Learning Development, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Anne Ramsden</name><affiliations><json:string>Project Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Dian Zhao</name><affiliations><json:string>Technical Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Academic libraries</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Copyright</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Cost estimating</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Electronic publishing</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Licensing</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Publishing industry</value></json:item></subject><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><abstract>Contends that networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries give rise to a number of significant issues, notably copyright and how to set a price which will give the publisher a reasonable return on investment and will be regarded by libraries as a fair and realistic scheme. Describes the experience of one university which has been carrying out extensive electronic library work over the last three years and draws conclusions which could have relevance at the national level.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>5.936</score><pdfVersion>1.1</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>595 x 842 pts (A4)</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><keywordCount>6</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>488</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>6526</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>41390</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>11</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>78</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries De Montfort Universitys experience</title><genre.original><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre.original><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>12</volume><publisherId><json:string>oclc</json:string></publisherId><pages><last>28</last><first>18</first></pages><issn><json:string>1065-075X</json:string></issn><issue>3</issue><subject><json:item><value>Library & information science</value></json:item><json:item><value>Librarianship/library management</value></json:item><json:item><value>Records management & preservation</value></json:item><json:item><value>Library technology</value></json:item><json:item><value>Information repositories</value></json:item></subject><genre><json:string>Journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><title>OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives</title><doi><json:string>10.1108/oclc</json:string></doi></host><publicationDate>1996</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1996</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1108/10650759610129585</json:string></doi><id>0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B</id><fulltext><json:item><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><extension>pdf</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><extension>zip</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries De Montfort Universitys experience</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>MCB UP Ltd</publisher><availability><p>EMERALD</p></availability><date>1996</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries De Montfort Universitys experience</title><author><persName><forename type="first">Mel</forename><surname>Collier</surname></persName><affiliation>Head of Division, Learning Development, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK</affiliation></author><author><persName><forename type="first">Anne</forename><surname>Ramsden</surname></persName><affiliation>Project Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</affiliation></author><author><persName><forename type="first">Dian</forename><surname>Zhao</surname></persName><affiliation>Technical Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives</title><idno type="pISSN">1065-075X</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1108/oclc</idno><imprint><publisher>MCB UP Ltd</publisher><date type="published" when="1996-09-01"></date><biblScope unit="volume">12</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">3</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="18">18</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="28">28</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1108/10650759610129585</idno><idno type="filenameID">1640120303</idno><idno type="original-pdf">1640120303.pdf</idno><idno type="href">10650759610129585.pdf</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1996</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Contends that networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries give rise to a number of significant issues, notably copyright and how to set a price which will give the publisher a reasonable return on investment and will be regarded by libraries as a fair and realistic scheme. Describes the experience of one university which has been carrying out extensive electronic library work over the last three years and draws conclusions which could have relevance at the national level.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>Keywords</head><item><term>Academic libraries</term></item><item><term>Copyright</term></item><item><term>Cost estimating</term></item><item><term>Electronic publishing</term></item><item><term>Licensing</term></item><item><term>Publishing industry</term></item></list></keywords></textClass><textClass><keywords scheme="Emerald Subject Group"><list><label>cat-LISC</label><item><term>Library & information science</term></item><label>cat-LLM</label><item><term>Librarianship/library management</term></item><label>cat-RMP</label><item><term>Records management & preservation</term></item><label>cat-LTC</label><item><term>Library technology</term></item><label>cat-IREP</label><item><term>Information repositories</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1996-09-01">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><extension>txt</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus emerald not found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><!-- Auto generated NISO JATS XML created by Atypon out of MCB DTD source files. Do Not Edit! --><article dtd-version="1.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research-article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">oclc</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="doi">10.1108/oclc</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">1065-075X</issn><publisher><publisher-name>MCB UP Ltd</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1108/10650759610129585</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="original-pdf">1640120303.pdf</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="filename">1640120303</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="type-of-publication"><compound-subject><compound-subject-part content-type="code">research-article</compound-subject-part><compound-subject-part content-type="label">Research paper</compound-subject-part></compound-subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="subject"><compound-subject><compound-subject-part content-type="code">cat-LISC</compound-subject-part><compound-subject-part content-type="label">Library & information science</compound-subject-part></compound-subject><subj-group><compound-subject><compound-subject-part content-type="code">cat-LLM</compound-subject-part><compound-subject-part content-type="label">Librarianship/library management</compound-subject-part></compound-subject><subj-group><compound-subject><compound-subject-part content-type="code">cat-LTC</compound-subject-part><compound-subject-part content-type="label">Library technology</compound-subject-part></compound-subject></subj-group></subj-group><subj-group><compound-subject><compound-subject-part content-type="code">cat-RMP</compound-subject-part><compound-subject-part content-type="label">Records management & preservation</compound-subject-part></compound-subject><subj-group><compound-subject><compound-subject-part content-type="code">cat-IREP</compound-subject-part><compound-subject-part content-type="label">Information repositories</compound-subject-part></compound-subject></subj-group></subj-group></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries: De Montfort University’s experience</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><string-name><given-names>Mel</given-names> <surname>Collier</surname></string-name><aff>Head of Division, Learning Development, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK</aff></contrib><x></x><contrib contrib-type="author"><string-name><given-names>Anne</given-names> <surname>Ramsden</surname></string-name><aff>Project Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</aff></contrib><x></x><contrib contrib-type="author"><string-name><given-names>Dian</given-names> <surname>Zhao</surname></string-name><aff>Technical Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</aff></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><day>01</day><month>09</month><year>1996</year></pub-date><volume>12</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>18</fpage><lpage>28</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>© MCB UP Limited</copyright-statement><copyright-year>1996</copyright-year><license license-type="publisher"><license-p></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri content-type="pdf" xlink:href="10650759610129585.pdf"></self-uri><abstract><p>Contends that networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries give rise to a number of significant issues, notably copyright and how to set a price which will give the publisher a reasonable return on investment and will be regarded by libraries as a fair and realistic scheme. Describes the experience of one university which has been carrying out extensive electronic library work over the last three years and draws conclusions which could have relevance at the national level.</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Academic libraries</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Copyright</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Cost estimating</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Electronic publishing</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Licensing</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Publishing industry</kwd></kwd-group><custom-meta-group><custom-meta><meta-name>peer-reviewed</meta-name><meta-value>no</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>academic-content</meta-name><meta-value>yes</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>rightslink</meta-name><meta-value>included</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-group></article-meta><ack><p>Parts of the material included in this article were published by the TPFL in the <italic>Proceedings of the EFLC Conference</italic> held in Brussels in October 1994.</p><p>Note: This paper was first published in Interlending & Document Supply, Volume 23 Number 4, 1995.</p></ack></front><body><sec><title>Introduction</title><p>Making materials published in journals and textbooks accessible through electronic libraries raises significant copyright issues. At present, to reproduce materials electronically, libraries are required to obtain the rights owners’ permission ‐ a not insignificant task in terms of building an electronic library. Approach several different publishers and there will be several different responses, or at worst, no response at all. Without a legal framework for the electrocopying of copyright material, publishers are rightly cautious about the release of electronic fields which can be merged, edited, copied, stored, distributed on the networks or re‐published as new products without their permission, leading to unfair use of an author’s work. The negotiation process leading to a license agreement is, therefore, long, cumbersome and without guarantee of success. Yet several organizations, including the universities of De Montfort (Arnold <italic>et al.</italic>, 1993), Carnegie Mellon (Arms, 1992) and Tilburg (Geleinjse, 1995), have begun to build electronic libraries by obtaining permission and paying the necessary license fee.</p><p>Most of these electronic library projects were underway when the only workable solution was to enter into licensing arrangements on a per publisher basis. In the last year, however, the copyright debate has become more structured and vocal. Libraries, publishers, rights experts, collection agencies, academics and other copyright players are gathering to discuss the issues at focus groups, including the Aslib “Copyright in multimedia” summit meeting held on July 18‐19, 1995 in London; the European Bureau of Library, Information & Documentation Association (EBLIDA) workshops held in various locations including London and Glasgow (<italic>Inform</italic>, 1995); and the Austrian Computer Society’s “KnowRight 95” International Congress on Intellectual Property Rights for Specialized Information, Knowledge and New Technologies held on 21‐25 August, 1995 in Vienna.</p><p>Meantime, the European Union (EU) has achieved an important step toward harmonization of copyright legislation in all its member countries by the development of directives protecting the rights of performers, broadcasters and recording companies, software and database producers. In addition, the EU is preparing a Green Paper on “Copyright and neighbouring rights in the information society”, which sets out to be a discussion document on copyright issues and will invite comments from interested parties with a view to defining a policy program (Gaster, 1995).</p><p>In the USA, the Information Infrastructure’s Task Force’s working group on intellectual property rights has made its recommendations in the Green Paper of July 1994 and has subsequently sponsored the Conference on Fair Use meetings, bringing together libraries, authors and publishers.</p><p>As a more appropriate legal framework evolves, publishers’ strategies are changing at the same time. For instance, at the ELVIRA conference, Academic Press announced its APPEAL electronic subscription scheme (Veltrop, 1995). Elsevier’s experience from the TULIP project (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.elsevier.nl">http://www.elsevier.nl</ext-link>) in the USA has led to a new electronic licensing scheme, which was announced in a press release dated February 23, 1995 (Elsevier Science, 1995).</p><p>Networking and licensing information for electronic libraries, it seems, will become an easier task as publishers respond to user needs. This article describes the experience of one university which has been carrying out extensive electronic library work over the last three years and draws conclusions which could have relevance at the national level.</p></sec><sec><title>De Montfort University’s electronic library’s research program</title><p>At the beginning of the 1990s, De Montfort University developed a new mission based on a three‐fold growth in student numbers and on geographical spread as a multi‐campus university. Today, the university has eight campuses on four sites in central and eastern England: Leicester, Lincoln, Milton Keynes and Bedford. It was recognized that technology‐based teaching, learning and information systems would be important components in fulfilling the mission. In 1991, the university embarked on an ambitious program of research and development with the aim of pushing the electronic library concept as far as possible in terms of emerging technologies and current commercial conditions. The program led to a family of several electronic library research projects with collaborating partners, including: <list list-type="bullet"><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>ELISE</italic> (electronic libraries image server for Europe) is a project funded under the first phase of the European Libraries Plan in the Third Framework Telematics program. The aim is to develop a prototype system for the interconnection of full‐color image banks held in libraries in the member countries (Black, 1995). The partners are De Montfort University (coordinator), Tilburg University Library, the National Art Library at the Victoria and Albert Museum and the IBM UK Scientific Centre. By taking a meta‐database approach, users will be able to retrieve and display images irrespective of the image bank location and the database management software under which the image bank is operating. The project deals with some major technical issues such as image quality, resolution and bandwith, image retrieval and design, and network retrieval (z39.50). The project ran for two years and ended in February 1995. It is hoped the work will continue under the next round of European funding.</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>ELSA</italic> (European libraries SGML application) is funded under the second phase of the European Libraries Plan in the Third Framework Telematics program. The partners are JOUVE, SA (coordinator), Elsevier B V and De Montfort University. The aim of the project is to develop a prototype end‐user system which will deliver SGML (standard generalized mark‐up language) documents from publisher to library, and allow the end‐user to manipulate them (Adams, 1994). A client‐server system, using both Mac and Windows‐based PC clients, will be developed. Elsevier will provide the journal data in SGML format, JOUVE will develop the interface and De Montfort will provide the user requirements and test and evaluation environment. The project started in January 1994 and ran until January 1996. There are some very interesting technical and standards issues and also great challenges to do with the development of appropriate charging mechanisms. One of the important standards issues is the emergence of SGML (and its derivative HTML (hyper text mark‐up language)) as one of the enabling components. This project will enable libraries to induct documents in these electronic journals into their electronic library stores.</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>Phoenix </italic>is<italic> </italic>a project led by South Bank University (London) to develop system(s) for delivering on‐demand course readers for undergraduates. This project started on July 1, 1995 and is funded by the HEFCE Joint Information Systems Committee’s Electronic Libraries Programme under the heading of “On demand publishing”. (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://ukoln.bath.ac.uk/elib/intro.html">http://ukoln. bath.ac.uk/elib/intro.html</ext-link>).</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>ELVIS</italic> (electronic library for visually impaired students) aims to provide visually impaired students with electronic access to library resources through the development of a special interface for the ELINOR electronic library system described below. There will be facilities for enlarging text and diagrams in books on the computer screen; for speech output; large screens for better display; and, finally, simple control of the system. This project is funded by the HEFCE under its 1994‐1995 Special Initiative to Encourage Widening Participation (De Montfort University, 1994/95).</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>ELINOR</italic>: (electronic library information online retrieval) is a project concerned with developing the electronic library in a teaching, learning and study environment, in which a large collection of information and learning materials in text and image form is made accessible to students and staff through desktop workstations. The project uses document image processing technology to build a pilot electronic library system for students on a business information systems course. Reading materials are scanned into the system with the agreement of publishers. A two‐year pilot phase has been completed and a new continuation phase has started in which the project will be scaled up. Knowledge gained in terms of technology, management, copyright negotiations and usage will be applied, and techniques developed further (Arnold <italic>et al.</italic>, 1993). The ELINOR pilot system was implemented in March 1993 (Zhao, 1995). The copyright material is held mainly in TIFF image format and compressed using the fax algorithm CCITT Group IV. The contents pages, abstracts and indexes of textbooks and journals are converted from image to machine‐readable text via the optical character recognition process. These text pages are automatically indices and used for searching, whereas the image pages are for browsing and reading. The project was funded until May 1996 by the British Library Research & Development Department and the IBM UK Scientific Centre.</p></list-item></list></p></sec><sec><title>The copyright issues arising from the projects</title><p>Although copyright and rights issues were not a specified part of the ELISE work program, they cannot be ignored. Rights in images are even more complex than are those pertaining to published printed documents. Images are individually protected even if embedded in text and can have very complex pedigrees. Often, useful developments can be stalled because too little attention is paid to these issues. In the ELISE project an early decision was taken to use only images which are copyright cleared or owned by the partners. This has allowed the project to develop technically without impediment.</p><p>ELSA is important because it heralds an imminent era in which the relationship between publisher and library and, for that matter, that between publisher and end‐user will become ever closer. It is clear that it is only a matter of time before scientific and technical journals will be delivered directly in electronic form to subscribers. The provision, built into this project, of end‐user editing and manipulation will stimulate the exploration of copyright issues in greater depth than hitherto. Naturally the work will proceed under tightly defined operational rules.</p><p>The PHOENIX project aims to develop, test or configure as necessary copyright clearance systems to automate clearance procedures and provide publisher feedback and accounting. Software development will be based on existing work at De Montfort under the ELINOR project, the reconfiguration of systems developed by Xerox and through experimentation with other electronic copyright management packages. One of the publishers involved is The Open University, which will be testing out EDI (electronic data interchange) or e‐mail techniques for clearance.</p><p>The PHOENIX project will store book chapters and articles recommended by course tutors, and will be modeled on the electronic reserve systems underway in a number of US and Australian universities, notably San Diego State University and the Australian National University. Some of these electronic reserve sites can be visited at a World Wide Web site coordinated by Jeff Rosedale at Columbia University. (http//<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.columbia.edu:80/rosedale/">www.columbia.edu:80/ rosedale/</ext-link>). Access is restricted, of course, for copyright reasons.</p><p>Through the ELVIS project we are hoping to clear permissions from publishers to scan copyright material for visually impaired students. External initiatives by bodies such as the British Royal National Institute for the Blind, the National Council for the Blind in Ireland and by the International Committee for Accessible Document Design[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="b1">1</xref>] will involve all the players working toward the creation of a legally‐embedded digital archive of published works accessible to print‐disabled students. Publishers, on the whole, tend to be sympathetic to the needs of visually handicapped persons. An outline licensing agreement suitable for use by a publisher wishing to consent to visually impaired persons using the publisher’s works for private and commercial purposes appears in the book, <italic>Publishing and Multimedia Law</italic> (Henry, 1994).</p><p>The ELINOR project has been successful in gaining the cooperation of a substantial group of publishers, probably more than any single university project in the UK. Publishers have given approval for their works to be scanned and held for reading in electronic form. At a time when there was still considerable caution among publishers, they gave permission to operate in controlled experimental conditions. The form of permission or license varies considerably. Clearly, they were very interested in learning from the experiment, and usage feedback was of particular interest. Several publishers have given additional support and advice through membership of the project’s advisory committee. It is envisioned that during the next phase the involvement of publishers will be closer. For instance, we are discussing with one publisher the development and trialing of one electronic title from start to finish. This will be a significant step onwards from the scanning of existing print‐based books. A more detailed examination of the copyright aspects of ELINOR follows.</p></sec><sec><title>ELINOR: negotiating agreements</title><p>ELINOR started when there was not the same level of constructive debate about electronic copyright as there is today. We wanted to develop a prototype electronic library and gain technical and operational experience at a time when there was no recognized infrastructure for gaining permissions, so we embarked on a program of establishing a series of bilateral agreements. To a certain extent, therefore, the project aimed to stimulate responses from publishers on an individual basis, when there was no prospect of a collective response.</p><p>Until copyright law becomes more specific, De Montfort University intends to go on negotiating licenses on a per publisher basis. The individual negotiations ensure that all participants ‐ publisher‐university‐user ‐ are reasonably protected financially. The drawbacks of <italic>ad hoc</italic> negotiations are that they are time‐consuming and result in a range of different agreements with different charging mechanisms.</p><p>The ELINOR project’s successful collaboration with publishers may be explained in part by the fact that it is an experiment with a limited number of terminals and because it can monitor and control use of electronic information. During the pilot phase, the ELINOR team negotiated short‐term licenses with 11 publishers for 53 textbooks.</p><p>The agreements specified which titles could be used, for what purpose and, in some cases, for what price. Conditions for usage were also set; for example, no electrocopying by our readers and printing of pages was limited. In return, the project team undertook to provide regular statistics on the use of the textbooks and journals, including details of which documents were “opened” and for how long, which pages viewed, pages printed and royalty charges. A usage statistics collection and management system and a printing control system were developed in‐house to meet these requirements. None of the publishers, however, was able to supply electronic files, hence the printed copies of textbooks and journals are scanned page by page and held in image form in the document database.</p><p>Scaling up the ELINOR system, which is now being extended both in terms of subject coverage and network access, will be our biggest challenge so far in publisher cooperation. The document content is being extended to meet the needs of all undergraduate courses in the institution, and the access points, which were restricted to the Milton Keynes site, are being extended to the main campus at Leicester. As part of this scaling up exercise, the project team is developing a model license agreement.</p></sec><sec><title>Model license agreement</title><p>We have enough experience from the pilot to develop a standard license agreement to speed up the negotiation process. This document was drawn up in collaboration with one publisher (Edward Arnold) and will help to negotiate effective agreements with future publisher partners. The working document prepares both parties ‐ the university and publisher ‐ regarding the purpose of the project, the networking and rights of access within a multi‐site organization, describes the role of the two parties and the conditions of usage and reports; furthermore, it prepares the way for discussion on the financial implications. The agreement is already generating useful feedback from publishers. The draft of the model agreement was used as a discussion document at the recent European Bureau of Library Information and Documentation Associations (EBLIDA) workshops in London and Glasgow in January 1995 (<italic>Inform</italic>, 1995), the aim of which was to encourage delegates to discuss a draft model agreement between electronic information provider and library.</p><p>An important step toward easing the flow of information on the networks has been taken by the US Coalition for Networked Information’s READI (rights for electronic access to and delivery of information) project (Peters, 1992)[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="b2">2</xref>] which has released a “Guide for negotiating networked information contracts and licenses” on its world Wide Web server (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www/cni.org/projects/READI/guide/www/intro.html">http://www/cni.org/projects/READI/guide/ www/intro.html</ext-link>). The guide itemizes the elements which should be present in a contract or license and how they affect both parties, the “buyer” and the “seller”. This may well lead to publishers licensing printed and electronic materials, such as scholarly journals and books, so that they can be made available over the networks to users in colleges, universities and other research and education institutions.</p></sec><sec><title>Copyright control, usage tracking and reports</title><p>From the outset of the ELINOR project, the team placed security and copyright management, including good auditing of document usage and royalty payment features, as priority requirements of the system. Access to materials is restricted to authorized users, that is, registered students and staff in the university. Authorized users log in to the system with their own identifiers. The copyright material is held securely on the electronic library server and unless the user has the appropriate authorization, the document cannot be copied from the server or manipulated by the user.</p><p>The licenses, of course, stipulate no electrocopying by readers and, in some cases, printing is limited. However, they permit the university to convert the printed material into image format for the purposes of storage and retrieval in the electronic library system. Image files represent a reasonably secure means of using electronic documents, because images can easily consume the space of a floppy disk if downloaded and the text cannot be altered with a text editor. Extraordinary use, such as the downloading/printing of large files, can also be monitored. Near all the in‐house workstations, which are located in the library, there are copyright notices which caution against downloading of the electronic works.</p><p>In a Windows environment, it is possible to capture images page by page by means of screen dumps, and there are cheap optical character recognition (OCR) tools which will convert the images to machine‐readable text; but it is a time‐consuming process for the user to “clean up” the error in the OCR’s ed text and is, therefore, a deterrent.</p><p>Copyright monitoring and handling royalties are a very important aspects of electronic library development. Some in‐house programming was necessary in order to track usage in the ELINOR system. The usage statistics collection program logs all files opened, including pages, and filters out the usage data in order to produce reports from the publishers and for project evaluation (Zhao, 1994). In the longer term, such statistics will assist libraries in determining the strategy for archiving unused or underused documents, document retrieval and system load. Usage data on a large scale may also be useful to publishers in providing a greater understanding of how their books and which parts of their books are used, thus informing their future publishing strategy. The usage statistics, for example, are an important input for deciding on pricing strategies, because information comparing the number of documents which users view on screen versus number of pages printed out will help determine whether additional payment is needed for printing out documents.</p><p>Printing is a complex process to manage, because different publishers have different requirements on charging and on the number of pages a user can print per day. Printing by individuals therefore has to be controlled on a per publisher basis. Typically, users are restricted to printing ten pages per book per day. The university also levies a seven pence basic print charge for each page printed. Several publishers have asked for a royalty on printed pages, and this is added to the basic print rate.</p><p>A printing control program has been developed which tracks all print requests and charges users for printing. The print requests are queued on the server and the pages will not be printed until the user comes to collect the printout. The printing control software checks for the various limits set by publishers, checks whether the user still has any credit left and, finally, if all conditions are met, prints out the pages with a copyright cover page. If the user does not collect within a week, the request is automatically deleted.</p></sec><sec><title>Pricing models for networked information</title><p>We are exploring new pricing models for networked information, including licenses for multiple sites. The participating publishers do not want to restrict access but are concerned about the potential loss of revenue, whereas the university wants its readers to have free access to text on the screen.</p><p>The pricing models under development for electronic publishing range from pay‐as‐you‐use to a flat fee structure for unlimited use based on user population, or end‐user payment perhaps by use of a smart card, which is like a credit card containing information about the user’s identity and the level of credit remaining in his or her account.</p><p>Two pricing models for networked electronic information are detailed here: <list list-type="order"><list-item><label>1 </label><p><italic>Use‐based pricing.</italic> This involves complex metering procedures to track which books are used, the pages viewed and printed. Libraries will have to collect small sums from users to pass on to the copyright owners. The management of these fees and payments would have to be organized. If users are charged for access, then the costs cannot be predicted and this would be a barrier to use, because the more popular the book, the more expensive it becomes. Pricing by usage is, therefore, not very attractive for libraries. On the other hand, publishers would receive statistics as well as revenue from use.</p></list-item><list-item><label>2 </label><p><italic>Institutional license</italic> (subscription‐based). The principle of an institutional license (also referred to as a “site license”, though this implies a restriction to one geographical location) is a single payment upfront with no additional charges for access by authorized users (staff and students), on or off‐campus. This license model is more attractive to libraries for many reasons. It does not require libraries to collect small sums from the users. The advantages are simplicity, it encourages use, and subscription pricing matches the library’s cost structure better so budget planning is possible. The problem is how to set the price. The disadvantage is that network licenses are likely to cost more money than the printed texts, which would change the profile of library expenditure. With the institutional license model libraries/universities with networked systems would have to demonstrate that they can control access and meter usage ‐ this, of course, benefits both libraries and publishers. Libraries want wider use of information because, in the case of journals, normally only one printed subscription is paid for and circulation is restricted. For publishers, wider use of journals/textbooks is a benefit, because a library will not purchase what is not used. Another approach would be a tiered pricing structure for electronic teaching materials, whereby an institutional license would allow the package to be loaded on to the campus network with unlimited use for a specified period, but for the publisher to offer less expensive options, for example, for individual users with appropriate equipment (Croom and Watkinson, 1994).</p></list-item></list></p><p>A number of pricing models are operating concurrently in the ELINOR project. The business arrangements negotiated with publishers run for a limited period, but can be reviewed at any stage.</p><sec><title>Electronic textbooks</title><p>The following models are in use: <list list-type="bullet"><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>No charge for selected titles </italic>‐ because the publishers felt that ELINOR is a controlled experiment from which both parties, libraries and publishers, can learn about the usage of electronic documents.</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>Contract fee </italic>‐ one publisher is charging us a nominal license fee of £1 per selected title for a one‐year license.</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>Fee per workstation</italic> ‐ in the early days of our pilot project, there were three ELINOR search and viewing workstations on open access in the library. The fee was based on the paperback price of the book × three access points (workstations).</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>Software license model </italic>‐<italic> </italic>software developers have been experimenting with site licenses based on the number of concurrent users for some time. This approach was adopted in the pilot phase by a few of the publishers whereby a fee was charged based on the software license (one‐third of the paperback price of book × ten (concurrent users)). The proportion of the book price was taken on the expectation that electronic delivery of books will be cheaper than printed copies (no storage and distribution costs, for example). The fee would then cover start‐up costs, editorial control, marketing, etc. and the multiple use.</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>Page charges</italic> ‐ for example, royalties per printed page from an electronic library document. The problem is that libraries have to handle small sums of money unless smart card technology can be implemented. This approach works very well for on‐demand printing systems such as those implemented for the electronic reserve systems, for example, the electronic book reserve room at San Diego State University (Bosseau, 1993). It is a charging mechanism which will be investigated by the Phoenix project.</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>Combination of software license model and page charges </italic>‐ may have access fee based on the number of concurrent users as well as a transactional charge.</p></list-item></list></p><p>The latter two charging mechanisms work reasonably well for the experimental phase of a project running on a small scale. However, if we increased the number of user licenses to 50 and the same charging mechanisms applied, the cost would be prohibitive. Such a pricing structure also influences the material selected for inclusion in an electronic library: while the library service could reasonably justify multiple access to a popular textbook used across a number of courses, it would be more reluctant to pay (<italic>n</italic>) × license fee for an expensive hardback text which is perhaps referenced only a few times each term (Bosseau, 1993). The tendency would, therefore, be for the electronic library to address the problems of books in high demand and, for example, to replace the short‐loan collection with an accessible electronic collection. These are, of course, the texts which in an ideal world we would expect students to purchase. It is loss of this potential revenue from students, and not the loss of sales of three or four copies to the university library, which the publishers most fear (Croom and Watkinson, 1994), and pricing models acceptable to all parties must be agreed if the larger scale electronic library is to be developed.</p><p>A more promising pricing model based on a defined user community has been suggested by Rosie Altoft of John Wiley: <list list-type="bullet"><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>Flat fee based on the potential user base (readership)</italic> ‐ a pricing model based on the number of students likely to use a recommended text on a course module reading list. The formula is 10 percent of the total number of such students in the university added to the cost of one hardback copy of the book. So, for example, if there are 200 students:</p></list-item></list></p><p> 200 students × 10 per cent + £20 (book price) = £40,</p><list list-type="bullet"><list-item><label>• </label><p>which would be the cost of an institutional license for one year. If the book in question is a core textbook the percentage could be higher.</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p>Publishers’ reactions have been mixed, however. Some say the fee is not enough because they are concerned that they will lose printed sales to students. On the other hand, some publishers have adopted it because they liked its simplicity. A less promising pricing model, still under discussion with the publisher, is based on the number of copies held by the library.</p></list-item><list-item><label>• </label><p><italic>Flat fee based on past purchases of printed copies</italic> ‐ the fee is the sum of the total purchase cost of copies of a title held in the library. This approach may recompense the authors, but there are a number of disadvantages. It does not take into account that electronic books will be less costly than printed ones, because costs such as printing, storage and distribution will be eliminated. It does not address the issue of multiple access or newly published works which are not held in printed form in the library ‐ in which case, how to charge? There is also the question of the duration of the license ‐ most printed paperback books have a shelf‐life of about five years, so are publishers prepared to grant a license spread over a five‐year period?</p></list-item></list><p>The preferred pricing model so far is the flat fee based on readership which, from the point of view of the publisher, ensures a steady new income stream, but has the flexibility to adjust various parameters ‐ for example, large numbers of readers, which may lead to a lowering of the percentage ‐ and the formula can be adjusted to take into account high value reference texts. From the viewpoint of libraries, it represents a reasonable subscription charge at a time when De Montfort University is carrying the cost of both a conventional and an experimental electronic library.</p><p>Agreements will have to be made which find a balance between rewarding publishers reasonably for multiple access and recognizing that there is a limit to the number of multiple copies of the print version that the university would have bought anyway. While we can show through ELINOR that we have the technology to track, meter and handle charges, we need the involvement of publishers as a means of not only endorsing the system, but using ELINOR as an experimental platform for new pricing models.</p></sec><sec><title>Electronic journals</title><p>Two agreements operate in respect of journals: <list list-type="order"><list-item><label>1 </label><p><italic>Basic print subscription with remote access</italic>. The university has permission from one publisher to scan the contents of the printed journal and to network access to two sites for the cost of a basic print subscription. The license agreements run for one year only. This would appear to be a fair price, and follows the pricing model used by producers of some CD‐ROM products.</p></list-item><list-item><label>2 </label><p><italic>Dual print subscriptions with remote access</italic>. One journal publisher requires that two of the campus libraries place print subscriptions to the same printed journal, and electronic access is included. Of course, the main disadvantage is that it is a very expensive option for universities with multiple sites, particularly in times of financial constraint when the university would not normally place a second subscription.</p></list-item></list></p><p>More acceptable electronic journal licensing schemes are coming on board, though they are still based on the print model. Elsevier have a new electronic subscription service whereby libraries can subscribe to both print and electronic versions (full text and image files) for 135 percent of the print subscription. Soon after Elsevier’s scheme was launched, Academic Press (AP) announced its electronic subscription service called the APPEAL (Academic Press print and electronic access license) scheme. According to Johannes Veltrop (Elsevier Science, 1995), Academic Press “is working on paradigms in which subscriptions are essentially replaced with licenses, giving subsequent free electronic access to every user affiliated with the library taking the license, thereby essentially reacting to increasing end‐user demand, while at the same time accommodating the dire financial situation the libraries find themselves in. Options to grant major incentives to consortia of libraries for taking licenses that span a whole range of journals are currently being explored.” Furthermore, AP is negotiating a national site license deal with the Higher Education Funding Council (Arnold and Ramsden, 1994). The journals are available as PDF (portable document format) files and readers require a special viewer, Adobe’s <italic>Acrobat</italic> reader software, on the hard disks of their viewing workstations. PDF files are converted postscript files and in many respects are like images.</p></sec></sec><sec><title>Publisher/library issues</title><p>At the beginning of the De Montfort projects the number of documented electronic library projects worldwide involving publisher‐library interactions was very small. Publishers and librarians naturally were extremely cautious about becoming involved in a field where the potential for market upheaval was high and where so little was known about the consequences of various strategies and courses of action. It was expected, therefore, that it would be difficult to obtain publisher cooperation with electronic library projects; but it is interesting to note that this was not invariably the case. Although publishers as an economic grouping are rightly cautious about electro‐copyright, we found that individually they were keen to become involved in experimentation and development.</p><p>Publishers were approached for permission to scan in texts on undergraduate reading lists for a certain course. They were assured that the material would be used only within De Montfort University and within the timescale and parameters of the project. Publishers were offered feedback on usage patterns. As might be expected, working with publishers on an individual basis produced a wide variety of responses. Some gave permission to scan in a simple letter with no additional conditions. Some required a formal contract for each book and some required special restrictions, for example, on printing. Provision of copyright acknowledgement was a general requirement. Attitudes to charging were equally varied. Most were content with no charge or a nominal charge on the understanding that this was research from which they would benefit. A few required a substantial charge, linked in some cases to the number of workstations or con‐current users. It is obvious that from the publisher’s point of view there is an imperative to maintain income streams during the transition from print‐based to electronic publishing. This may lead publishers to propose charging schemes which, from the library’s point of view, are unrealistic. An unrealistic charging scheme may be evidence that a publisher is not yet ready to take risks on a license which has liberal electrocopying provision. Print provides an effective control mechanism for the publisher, restricting unauthorized copying to levels which, if not fully understood, are being managed within existing economic frameworks. So what type of arrangement will give the publisher a reasonable return on investment and be regarded by libraries as a fair and realistic scheme?</p><p>Let us assume that the business aim of the publisher is to maximize return on investment in publications and infrastructure. In a situation where business is done, not by selling artifacts (books, journals, etc.) but by selling access to information, two basic forms of charging seem to commend themselves: licensing; and charging by usage. Licensing is well established in the software market and seems to offer a feasible model. It is amenable to sensitivity adjustment according to the number of users in the user population ‐ for example the number of students in the university. The copyright owner may, however, have reservations that the license fee will not cover adequately the number of copies being made.</p><p>Charging by usage, on the other hand, may seem to be an eminently fair way of arranging payment. It satisfies the basic principle that one pays for what one uses and only for what one uses. From the publisher’s point of view this may be much fairer than the lending library situation where volume of use is not recognized (leaving aside the UK public lending right scheme for very high volume usage). From the library’s point of view, however, there is a danger that costs would escalate out of control. For both the library and the publisher, such a scheme would be complex and costly to maintain.</p><p>At present scientific and technical journals are the main focus of attention between publishers and libraries for electronic libraries. Many are relatively high cost, low print‐run publications for which electronic publishing is suitable. They can be transferred to the electronic environment without necessarily undergoing radical change of form. It may be that experience should be gained with new charging mechanisms while the format of the publication is not radically changed. It may then be easier to accommodate the more fundamental changes on the horizon such as regarding the article as the basic unit of publication rather than the journal issue.</p><p>If journals present an opportunity for the smoother transition to electronic publication, textbooks probably pose the more fundamental challenges. Already universities are experimenting with compilations of student texts which will necessitate appropriate charging models for volume reproduction by electronic means. Changing methods of teaching and learning are bringing nearer complete multi‐media courses which will affect not only the economics of textbook publishers but also the economics of university courses. The economic performance of the library in providing efficient access to electronic materials is therefore a key factor in the overall performance of the university: a fact which has been underestimated in the past.</p><p>From the library’s point of view, a charging mechanism is required which provides the benefits of electronic publishing, such as easy access to large amounts of information, at a cost which is manageable and, more importantly, predictable. Open‐ended usage charging is therefore unlikely to be acceptable. At the same time the library may well encourage an element of usage‐related payment in order to achieve efficiencies by not paying for little used material. A scheme which is based on a license with some allowance for volume may be appropriate. It follows that the library may be prepared to pay more (but not much more) for electronic information which is well used, on the basis that it will be paying less for information which is seldom or never used. Overall, the library will expect to get much more information for less money because that is what the information technology revolution leads us to expect, and governments expect universities to be ever more efficient. The scheme will need to be simple because, if the cost of compliance is too high, it will not be successful.</p><p>It appears that economic modeling of electronic publishing and electronic libraries is not well developed compared with the technologies which are attracting a great deal of attention. Not enough is known about how the various mechanisms would affect the viability of publishing firms and not enough is known about how libraries would cope with changing patterns of use and ensuing cost variations. It should be noted that we are dealing here with much more than the changing costs of different media. In libraries, a substantial move toward electronic information will change predicted storage and building requirements. Fewer staff would be needed to handle stock movement, but more staff may be needed to help users navigate the information highway. Publishers will need to invest in the standards and infrastructure which will deliver electronic information to libraries and homes and gradually will need to run down the infrastructure designed to move paper around.</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusion</title><p>It should be noted that De Montfort’s electronic library projects have been taking place over the last three years, during which time the amount of electronic library work going on internationally has increased considerably. In Europe we have had the very successful European libraries plan under the Third Framework which has stimulated a high level of activity. In the UK, within the higher education sector there has been the technology in teaching and learning program and, just recently the Follett review of university libraries, which is expected to stimulate a large amount of new work. It is reasonable to suppose that this level of project work in the electronic library field will produce a more structured and concerted approach between the publishing industry and libraries.</p><p>Throughout this article it has been convenient to analyse separately the requirements of publishers and libraries because there is still a clear need for a supplier and customer relationship. However, the question of economic modeling is too fundamental for the two interest groups to develop their thinking in isolation. The changes in technical and infrastructure requirements require a highly integrated approach, which is why cooperative developments are essential. Publishers need to understand the economic framework within which libraries operate and libraries need to understand the business aims of publishers and the limitations within which they operate. Furthermore, the developing role of the library as a publisher on demand and the developing role of the publisher as a provider of integrated multimedia learning materials is creating a wider common understanding of the economic framework which will enable the transition of the electronic library from its present prototypes to its operational phase.</p></sec><sec><title>Notes</title><list list-type="order"><list-item><label>1. </label><p> 1ICADD (International Committee for Accessible Document Design), “An introduction and call for participation. Information and technology for the disabled” (ITD)‐JNL@JUVM.STJOHNS.EDU).</p></list-item><list-item><label>2. </label><p> 2Coalition of Networked Information’s READI Project (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.cni.org/projects.READI">http://www.cni.org/projects.READI</ext-link>).</p></list-item></list></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="b1"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Adams</surname>, <given-names>R.J.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1994</year>, “<article-title><italic>European libraries SGML applications</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Library Technology News</italic></source>, <publisher-name>No. 13</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>June/July, pp. 3‐5.</publisher-loc></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b2"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Arms</surname>, <given-names>W.Y</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1992</year>., “Experience in collection development for an electronic library”, paper presented at the Knowledge for Europe: Librarians and Publishers Working Together Conference, organized by the European Foundation for Library Co‐operation and the Working Group of European Librarians and Publishers Conference, November 11‐13, Palais des Congrès, Brussels.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b3"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Arnold</surname>, <given-names>K.</given-names></string-name></person-group> and <person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Ramsden</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1994</year>, “<article-title><italic>The electronic library: an opportunity for collaboration? A case study based on the ELINOR project at De Montfort University Milton Keynes</italic></article-title>”, paper presented at the International Association of Technical University Libraries Conference, <publisher-name>Sheffield University</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>July 4.</publisher-loc></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b4"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Arnold</surname>, <given-names>K.J.</given-names></string-name></person-group>, <person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Collier</surname>, <given-names>M.W.C.</given-names></string-name></person-group>, <person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Ramsden</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name></person-group>, <person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Wu</surname>, <given-names>Z.</given-names></string-name></person-group> and <person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Zhao</surname>, <given-names>D.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1993</year>, “<article-title><italic>Electronic library for higher education: an experiment at De Montfort University, Milton Keynes</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Journal of Information Networking</italic></source>, Vol. <volume>45</volume> No. <issue>1</issue>, pp. <fpage>3</fpage><x>‐</x><lpage>6</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b5"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Black</surname>, <given-names>K.H.C.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>, “<article-title><italic>ELISE: the online delivery of images to the desktop</italic></article-title>”, in <person-group person-group-type="editor"><string-name>Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Computers in Libraries Conference</string-name></person-group>, <publisher-name>March 7‐9</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>London, Learned Information Ltd</publisher-loc>, Oxford, pp. <fpage>21</fpage><x>‐</x><lpage>6</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b6"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Bosseau</surname>, <given-names>D.L.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1993</year>, “<article-title><italic>Anatomy of a small step forward: the electronic reserve book room at San Diego State University</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Journal of Academic Librarianship</italic></source>, Vol. <volume>18</volume> No. <issue>5</issue>, pp. <fpage>366</fpage><x>‐</x><lpage>8</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b7"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Croom</surname>, <given-names>D.</given-names></string-name></person-group> and <person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Watkinson</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1994</year>, “<article-title><italic>Principles of charging by publishers for networked textbooks</italic></article-title>”, unpublished paper presented at the Electronic Libraries and Visual Information Research (ELVIRA) Conference, organized by De Montfort University, Milton Keynes, May 3‐5.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b8"><mixed-citation><article-title><italic>De Montfort University</italic></article-title> (<year>1994/95</year>, “<article-title><italic>ELVIS project (1994/ 1995)</italic></article-title>”, in <person-group person-group-type="editor"><string-name>Skill</string-name></person-group> (National Bureau for Students with Disabilities), <source><italic>Projects Update</italic></source>, <publisher-name>Christmas 1994</publisher-name>, pp. <fpage>16</fpage><x>‐</x><lpage>17</lpage> Easter 1995, p. 19; Summer 1995, pp. 20‐1.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b9"><mixed-citation><article-title><italic>Elsevier Science</italic></article-title> (<year>1995</year>, “<article-title><italic>Elsevier announces: electronic subscriptions, the next step after Tulip</italic></article-title>”, <publisher-name>Elsevier Science Press Release</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>February 23.</publisher-loc></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b10"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Gaster</surname>, <given-names>J.L.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>, “<article-title><italic>Copyright and neighbouring rights in the European information society</italic></article-title>” (European Commission DGXV, Brussels), in<italic>roceedings of the Copyright in Multimedia: Summit Meeting to Negotiate a New Copyright Dynamic between Creators, Products and Users in the Emerging Digital Era, </italic>London, July 18‐19, Aslib, London.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b11"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Geleijnse</surname>, <given-names>H.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>, “<article-title><italic>Developing an electronic library: new developments at Tilburg University</italic></article-title>”, in <person-group person-group-type="editor"><string-name>Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Computers in Libraries Conference</string-name></person-group>, <publisher-name>London</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>March 7‐9, Learned Information Ltd</publisher-loc>, Oxford, pp. <fpage>75</fpage><x>‐</x><lpage>8</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b12"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Henry</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1994</year>, “<article-title><italic>Document 42: licence for the visually handicapped</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Publishing and Multimedia Law</italic></source>, <publisher-name>Butterworths</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>London, pp. 652‐4.</publisher-loc></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b13"><mixed-citation><article-title><italic>Inform (1995) ”Electronic copyright: towards a standard agreement?”, No. 172, March, pp. 2‐3.</italic></article-title></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b14"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Peters</surname>, <given-names>P.E.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1992</year>, “<article-title><italic>Making the market for networked information: an introduction to a proposed program for licensing electronic uses</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Serials Review</italic></source>, (Special double issue: economic models for networked information), Vol. <volume>18</volume> Nos <year>1‐2</year>, pp. <fpage>19</fpage><x>‐</x><lpage>24</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b15"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Veltrop</surname>, <given-names>J.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>, “<article-title><italic>Keeping the minutes of science</italic></article-title>”, in <person-group person-group-type="editor"><string-name>Proceedings of Electronic Libraries</string-name></person-group> and <person-group person-group-type="editor"><string-name>Visual Information Research</string-name></person-group> (ELVIRA) Conference, organized by De Montfort University, <publisher-name>Milton Keynes</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>May 2‐4, Aslib</publisher-loc>, London, (in press). This paper is also on the World Wide Web at: <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://ford.mk.mu.ac.uk/elvira/velterop.html">http://ford.mk.mu.ac.uk/elvira/velterop.html</ext-link></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b16"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Zhao</surname>, <given-names>D.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1994</year>, “<article-title><italic>The ELINOR electronic library system</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Electronic Library</italic></source>, Vol. <volume>12</volume> No. <issue>5</issue>, pp. <fpage>289</fpage><x>‐</x><lpage>93</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="b17"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Zhao</surname>, <given-names>D.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>, “<article-title><italic>Usage statistics collection and management in the ELINOR electronic library</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Journal of Information Science</italic></source>, Vol. <volume>21</volume> No. <issue>1</issue>, pp. <fpage>59</fpage><x>‐</x><lpage>66</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list><ref-list><title>Further reading</title><ref id="b18"><mixed-citation><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Richards</surname>, <given-names>H.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>, “<article-title><italic>HEFCE buys right to copy freely</italic></article-title>”, <source><italic>Times Higher Education Supplement, Multimedia Supplement</italic></source>, <publisher-name>July 14</publisher-name>, p. 1..</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries De Montfort Universitys experience</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries De Montfort Universitys experience</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Mel</namePart><namePart type="family">Collier</namePart><affiliation>Head of Division, Learning Development, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Anne</namePart><namePart type="family">Ramsden</namePart><affiliation>Project Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Dian</namePart><namePart type="family">Zhao</namePart><affiliation>Technical Coordinator, Elinor Project, De Montfort University, Hammerwood Gate, Milton Keynes, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>MCB UP Ltd</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1996-09-01</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1996</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">Contends that networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries give rise to a number of significant issues, notably copyright and how to set a price which will give the publisher a reasonable return on investment and will be regarded by libraries as a fair and realistic scheme. Describes the experience of one university which has been carrying out extensive electronic library work over the last three years and draws conclusions which could have relevance at the national level.</abstract><subject><genre>Keywords</genre><topic>Academic libraries</topic><topic>Copyright</topic><topic>Cost estimating</topic><topic>Electronic publishing</topic><topic>Licensing</topic><topic>Publishing industry</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives</title></titleInfo><genre type="Journal">journal</genre><subject><genre>Emerald Subject Group</genre><topic authority="SubjectCodesPrimary" authorityURI="cat-LISC">Library & information science</topic><topic authority="SubjectCodesSecondary" authorityURI="cat-LLM">Librarianship/library management</topic><topic authority="SubjectCodesSecondary" authorityURI="cat-RMP">Records management & preservation</topic><topic authority="SubjectCodesSecondary" authorityURI="cat-LTC">Library technology</topic><topic authority="SubjectCodesSecondary" authorityURI="cat-IREP">Information repositories</topic></subject><identifier type="ISSN">1065-075X</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">oclc</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1108/oclc</identifier><part><date>1996</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>12</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>3</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>18</start><end>28</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1108/10650759610129585</identifier><identifier type="filenameID">1640120303</identifier><identifier type="original-pdf">1640120303.pdf</identifier><identifier type="href">10650759610129585.pdf</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">© MCB UP Limited</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>EMERALD</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Ticri/CIDE/explor/OcrV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000E18 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000E18 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Ticri/CIDE
|area= OcrV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:0DC9B6C260D78866AA50B3302ADD0E965724004B
|texte= Networking and licensing texts for electronic libraries De Montfort Universitys experience
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |