Category Archives: news

The OCLC Kerfuffle: In which I write much but come to few conclusions

By IRIS Posted on by

I’ve been watching the OCLC policy change discussion unfold slowly over the last few weeks, and I’ve got to say, I’m flummoxed. On the one hand, I don’t like the new license. I agree with most of what’s been written about the potential dangers it poses to innovation and the odd irony that member institutions will pay large sums of money to hand over their data to OCLC so that OCLC can lock it down for them. (I’ve included links to key posts and documents down at the bottom of this post, for those who’d like to catch up.) On the other hand, who am I to claim that OCLC has no right to try to sustain itself financially?

For me, the topic hinges on three main questions:

  • Is this really a change, and if so, how significant of a change is it?
  • What do they really mean by “Reasonable Use”?
  • And what does this mean for those of us that aren’t in the business of creating and maintaining bibliographic systems?

So first of all, is this really a change?

Karen Calhoun of OCLC has written more than once that the new license is just a clarification of the old license and that it serves to protect the community’s investment in the WorldCat records. She commented on Aaron Swartz’s blog post that “the policy carries forward the principles, if not the wording of the current Guidelines, which have been in place since 1987.” Later she wrote on her own blog at length and again asserted:

The difference is not in the principles, then, but the environment in which the principles are applied. The Guidelines [meaning the old policy] came from the limited data sharing environment of the 1980s. The updated policy’s landscape is the Web and the incredibly dynamic data sharing environment it represents. (cite)

In other words, the old policy protected community investment in the cooperative at a time when mass data sharing was not the norm, and the new policy protects that same community investment in the current environment where the default assumption on the web is that if there’s a big pile of data out there, anyone who wants to can play with it and make it work for them.

I have no idea whether the old policy felt restrictive 21 years ago, but I know that the new one feels restrictive now. It seems to me that the paradigm shifted right out from under OCLC and that reinforcing the principles of information sharing from 21 years ago is akin to re-inventing the information searching environment of 10-20 years ago.

It also seems to me that if libraries invest time, effort, and money into building a massive dataset, the best return on that investment would be to have people (OCLC or anyone else) take that data and make it work for us and for our patrons. This is what we do when we invest in the stock market, or even put money into savings accounts. We effectively sign it over to whomever can take it and make it work for us. The way this new policy reads, it feels more like protecting our treasures by tucking them into a safe deposit box. We rent the space and gain no interest, causing our “investment” to depreciate over time.

So maybe we’re just protecting OCLC’s investment in our data. Personally, I’d feel better about the whole thing if they just came out and said that.

What about this “Reasonable Use“ clause?

There’s also one clause in the policy that I find disturbingly vague. It’s the clause that defines “reasonable use,” and serves a very similar function in this license as the Fair Use clause serves in copyright law. Here it is:

13. “Reasonable Use” means Use of WorldCat Records that is reasonable for the intended Non-Commercial Use and consistent with the intent of this Policy. Without limiting the foregoing, the term “Reasonable Use” does not include any Use of WorldCat Records that:

a. discourages the contribution of bibliographic and holdings data to WorldCat, thus damaging OCLC Members’ investment in WorldCat, and/or
b. substantially replicates the function, purpose, and/or size of WorldCat. Please see the FAQ for a discussion of Z39.50 for cataloging using WorldCat-derived bibliographic records.

As Greg Schwartz noted on this week’s Uncontrolled Vocabulary, there are a lot of weasel words here. How big, how related in function, and how related in purpose does a system have to be before it violates this clause? And then there are the conspicuous “and/or” weasel words that leave OCLC room to claim license violation if any part of this clause begins to make them uneasy.

Seems to me that the biggest violator of section 13.b in existence right now is the Library of Congress, and that makes no sense at all. But if you think about it, its catalog is massive and exactly duplicates most of the functions of WorldCat. LibraryThing is also massive, but serves such a completely different purpose that I can’t see how it harms the “investment” of the cooperative. If anything, its giving the cooperative ideas about what might be possible in our own catalogs given the data they produce.

Just as a side note, I wonder if they have to grant Google and other search engines the right to crawl WorldCat.org.

Implications for those us in the public services world?

So what. Why do I care? In my day-to-day work, I search WorldCat when I need it, and I’ll continue to do so. I don’t do cataloging work. I won’t be the one deciding whether or not to put the new field that links to OCLC’s license in our records. And I certainly don’t build discovery systems that would make use of WorldCat records.

Well, I worry about two things. First, that this will stall efforts to invent a discovery system that actually works, and works well — one that patrons are happy to use, and one that puts to good use all of the metadata that catalogers put so much time and effort into creating.

I also worry that this move might implode OCLC. It has the chance to take a hard look at its “principles” and come up with creative ways to position itself as the nexis of all bibliographic data on the web, or it could spark its potential user community to rebell and rebuild elsewhere. My favorite analogy for this comes from Steve Lawson’s blog where he writes:

Coincidentally, I was reading Matthew Battles’ Library: An Unquiet History today and came across this interesting tidbit on page 29 about the Library of Alexandria:

In an effort to stop the growth of the libraries at Rhodes and Pergamum, both of which threatened Alexandria’s preeminence, the city’s rulers banned the export of papyrus. The move backfired, however, spurring the Pergamenes to invent parchment (charta pergamenum), which for its strength and reusability would prove to be the preferred writing medium in Europe for more than a thousand years.

WorldCat has been making great strides forward recently, and I would hate to see it shoot itself in the foot over a piece of papyrus. It also has an incredible treasure trove of information, one that would be a shame to have to duplicate, and one that could yield huge dividends if invested wisely rather than stuffed into a safe deposit box.

Or is this the push we all needed?

For further reading:

Carleton is an Excellent Library!

By IRIS Posted on by

It’s official. Carleton College is this year’s recipient of ACRL’s Excellence in Academic Libraries award in the college library division!!!!! (press release)

I’ve said it before, but I can’t say it enough: I’m so lucky to work with such a dedicated and creative bunch of co-workers, and I’m so lucky to be able to work with them in a library and on a campus like this one. Reading over the essay that my colleague, Matt, wrote for the award application, I realized yet again how much I’ve learned by working with this group and how much I value their energy, their creativity, and their friendship. They are Teh Awesome!

Anyone Want to Come Work With Me?

By IRIS Posted on by

The seven of us in the Reference & Instruction department are thrilled with the idea that soon we will be eight! Here’s the ad (and here):

Purpose of this Position:

Carleton College seeks an innovative and energetic librarian to join us in our lively and imaginative program of information resources and services. This new full-time position will increase our support of the social sciences from 1.0 FTE to 2.0 FTE. This is an ideal position for an individual who is 1) looking for an opportunity to work in an institution focused on teaching, in collaboration with an unusually fine group of students, faculty, and colleagues; 2) committed to excellence in teaching; and 3) deeply rooted in and excited about a social sciences discipline. The Reference and Instruction Librarian for the Social Sciences will report to the Head of Reference and Instruction.

Responsibilities:

  • Work closely with current liaison to expand support to faculty and students in social sciences. See: http://www.carleton.edu/campus/library/reference/liaisons.html.
  • Assist in information literacy planning, teaching, development, and instruction.
  • Participate in a well-utilized individual student appointment model.
  • Participate in our Research/IT desk service.

All members of the team participate in campus initiatives and faculty development presentations, evening and weekend reference rotation, and reference collection development. Liaisons also work together on user guide design and development, production of handouts and publications, and quirky publicity activities. We are committed to collaborating with IT and other academic support units.

Carleton College is a highly selective, residential, liberal arts college located about 45 miles south of Minneapolis and St. Paul. The Gould Library (http://www.carleton.edu/campus/library) strongly encourages and supports professional development, initiative, and imaginative approaches to information services. We place a high value on a solid grounding in the world of books and scholarly information.

Minimum Qualifications:

Required:

  • ALA-accredited MLS or equivalent.
  • Strong service orientation, initiative, and flexibility.
  • The desire and ability to work both independently and as a part of a collaborative, decision-making team.
  • Excellent interpersonal skills.
  • Outstanding oral and written communication skills.
  • Strong teaching skills.

Preferred:

  • Academic library experience, including reference and teaching experience.
  • Strong interest in, knowledge, or experience in assessing user needs.
  • Intrigued by uses of social software in libraries.
  • Advanced degree in the social sciences.

If interested, please send a letter of interest (including where you learned about this position), résumé, and three references complete with address, email, and phone numbers to Carleton College, Human Resources, One North College Street, Northfield, MN 55057. Application review begins October 22, 2007, and continues until the position is filled. Visit our web site at www.carleton.edu. Carleton College is an equal opportunity employer committed to excellence through diversity.

“Social Sciences” at our school means Economics, Education, International Relations, Political Economy, Political Science, and Sociology & Anthropology (a dual department here).

So… who wants to come work with me?

Want Walt?

By IRIS Posted on by

For all of you who’ve thought at one time or another, “Hmmm, I wish I had a Walt working here,” now’s your chance. He’s officially on the job-hunt, and I sure wish I could hire him. He’s a thoughtful writer and an engaged thinker, and he’s been a good and supportive friend to me ever since I got into this online life of mine. My own wishes and desires are thwarted, though, by my lack of hiring power (being a fairly low-level grunt here), so I offer the best that I can do: a blog post.