New Maryland Legislation on Ebook Licensing

 The Maryland State Legislation passed SB432/HB518, which (synopsis from the Senate bill):

Requiring a publisher who offers to license an electronic literary product to the public to also offer to license the electronic literary product to public libraries in the State on reasonable terms that would enable public libraries to provide library users with access to the electronic literary product; authorizing the license terms authorizing public libraries to provide access to electronic literary products to include certain limitations; defining "electronic literary product"; etc.

Many people worked on this bill, recognizing its importance to libraries. While others opposed it, the bill became law!  It was not signed by the Governor, which I think is unfortunate.  Rather he allowed it to become law without his endorsement.   

Why is it important? As Andrew Albanese states:

SB432 requires any publisher offering to license "an electronic literary product" to consumers in the state to also offer to license the content to public libraries "on reasonable terms" that would enable library users to have access. The bill is scheduled to take effect in January, 2022.

Yes, libraries will have access to the same ebooks that are offered to consumers. Amazing that this isn't already being done, right? But publishers wrongly see libraries as being in competition with them, and so some withhold their ebooks from libraries. This practice harms our communities. As Jonathan Band stated in his written testimony about this bill, "In other words, the bills prevent unreasonable discrimination against public libraries." (Quoted by Matt Enis)

Please note that this bill - and similar bills being introduced into other state legislatures - do not affect copyright. Rather they are looking to state law to create a level playing field for libraries.

I encourage you to read the Maryland bill and then look to see if groups in your state are advocating for something similar. Note that legislation has been proposed in New York and Rhodes Island.  I think as bills are proposed, each will learn from what happened in another state. For example, the Maryland bill may not have everything that another state would want. And every state will have to wrangle with the publishers and their interests, as they work to balance the interest of libraries and constituents. How will that affect wording, etc.? We will have to wait to see.

Resources

• Albanese, Andrew. (June 1, 2021) Maryland Library E-book Bill Becomes Law. Publisher's Weekly.
• Enis, Matt. (June 1, 2021) Maryland Passes Law Requiring Publishers to License Ebooks to Libraries Under “Reasonable Terms.” Library Journal.
• ALA. (June 1, 2021) ALA Joint Digital Content Working Group paper calls for improved access, licensing models, pricing to serve readers.

Webinar: Frequently Asked Questions About Controlled Digital Lending, June 10

On June 10, 12 noon ET, I am part of a webinar entitled "Frequently Asked Questions About Controlled Digital Lending." Registration is now open.

Description  

Controlled Digital Lending (CDL) is a widely used library practice that supports digital lending for libraries of all sizes. Even though CDL is used at hundreds of libraries around the world, questions remain about this important innovation in digital library lending. In this session, we'll be tackling the most commonly asked questions surrounding CDL and answering some of yours. Bring your thoughts and ideas – it's the summer of CDL. 

 

This session is co-sponsored by EveryLibrary, Internet Archive & Library Futures.

The session will be recorded and all registrants will receive a followup email with a link to the video, so go ahead and register, even if you can't make the synchronous event.

Clarivate acquiring ProQuest: Remember the days before all of the consolidations?

It is now old news that Clarivate is acquiring ProQuest. According to Marydee Ojala, Claravite can trace its roots to 1864 (Zoological Record) and ProQuest to 1938 (UMI). Marshall Breeding notes that this deal is worth $5.3 billion.  Because Clarivate and ProQuest do not have overlapping products, this does not decrease the competition.

Below is ProQuest's acquisition activity from Library Technology Guides. This does not capture, for example, Dialog's history of being acquired by other companies, so the landscape is even more complex.

People have different opinions about whether this is good or bad for libraries.  Having lived through library vendors' mergers and acquisitions (M&A) since the late 1980s, I know that these do eliminate jobs, provide fewer vendors to have booths at library conferences, and can put important decisions in the hands of fewer people. I wonder how these M&A's impact:

• the diversity of who works for one of these companies
• the diversity of thought and problem-solving approaches in the companies
• how welcoming these larger companies are to new and perhaps radical ideas

BTW I suspect that Clarivate's workers are more diverse than its leadership, based on the photos of its executive team and the location of its regional offices.

Think I'll pour myself a cup of tea and stroll down memory lane as I stare at the chart below...If you have thoughts on this, please leave a comment and share them. Thank you!

Report: Creating Solutions Together: Lessons to Inform the Future of Collective Licensing

The Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) commissioned Creating Solutions Together: Lessons to Inform the Future of Collective Licensing, which reviews " a quarter century of development in collective licensing for text publishing." The volume was commissioned to commemorate "the 25th anniversary of the final appellate decision in the case of American Geophysical Union et al. v. Texaco Inc." Christopher Kenneally interviewed one of the authors of Creating Solutions Together, Lois Wasoff, for the Velocity of Content podcast. Velocity of Content is available wherever you listen to podcasts.

I enjoyed listening to the 18-minute podcast interview with Wasoff and hearing her take on licensing. I have not yet read the report, but have done a quick skim of her portion.  She seems to take a narrower view of how Fair Use can be used than I would.  That is her viewpoint and supported, I'm sure, by the CCC. That's fine, but I think we should be willing to exercise Fair Use more and push on its boundaries a bit.

If you read this report and have an opinion in it, please drop a comment on this post and share your thoughts. Thanks!

---

Subscribe to Digitization 101 through Feedblitz

The Chatham House Rule

I am on five different boards of directors/trustees and involved in other organizations, in ADDITION to my own consulting work. Yes, I'm busy and in many conversations. One group recently introduced me to the Chatham House Rule and I thought I'd share it here. According to Wikipedia:

Under the Chatham House Rule, anyone who comes to a meeting is free to use information from the discussion, but is not allowed to reveal who made any comment. It is designed to increase openness of discussion. The rule is a system for holding debates and discussion panels on controversial topics, named after the headquarters of the UK Royal Institute of International Affairs, based in Chatham House, London, where the rule originated in June 1927.

I like this idea of having an open discussion, exchanging information, and allowing people to use what they heard without revealing who said it. This allows for a freer flow of information in and outside of the meeting. Given some of the conversations we all need to be having in our society, the Chatham House Rule could be very useful.

Have you used this rule? How did you get people comfortable with it? What benefits have you seen?  Please leave a comment and let me (and others) know. Thanks.

---

Subscribe to Digitization 101 through Feedblitz