“At the core of a good policy…is the position that users are responsible for clearing whatever permissions are needed”
A duty of users
To adopt policies calling for permission to publish, the library is not only imposing an artificial layer of restrictions, it is also putting itself where it should never be: practicing law (Rick Anderson, “Asserting Rights We Don’t Have,” Peer to Peer Review, LJ 9/15/14, p. 12).
For the library to determine that someone may or may not reproduce another’s work, the library is effectively stating a legal conclusion to a third party. We learn at the beginning of library school not to give legal and medical advice.
At the core of a good policy (albeit under a clumsy copyright law) is the position that users are responsible for clearing whatever permissions are needed, and unless the institution, in fact, is the rights holder, the library or archives will neither grant nor deny permission.
Donor restrictions are another story. They should be avoided, but sometimes they are part of the price of acquiring the collections.
Thanks for the insightful column and all the good comments.
—Kenneth D. Crews, Attorney, Gipson Hoffman & Pancione, Los Angeles; faculty, Law Sch., Columbia Univ., New York
Permission courtesy
I agree that it’s time to let go of permissions policies or drastically limit their scope (Rick Anderson, “Asserting Rights We Don’t Have,” Peer to Peer Review, LJ 9/15/14, p. 12).
However, it should be noted that permissions requirements did not come about solely—or even primarily—because libraries wanted to control use of materials but because publishers demanded permission letters from authors. I’ve been through this maddening process as an author myself. Many libraries have provided the letters simply as a courtesy.
—Jeffrey D. Marshall, Dir. of Research Collections, Bailey/Howe Lib., Univ. of Vermont, Burlington
The kick we needed
Rick Anderson’s “Asserting Rights We Don’t Have” (Peer to Peer Review, LJ 9/15/14, p. 12) is a timely and important piece.
In fact, we were already in the process of removing the outdated “permission to publish” policy from our website and have been refining our site for several months!
This piece was just the kick we needed to remove our permissions policy immediately and for good. We will have completely refreshed policies this quarter. It’s great to see this topic expanded to include the wider library community.
—Audra Eagle Yun, Head of Special Collections & Archives, Univ. Libs.,Univ. of California, Irvine
Always convenience
Harold N. Boyer seems to suggest that new library services should not be provided outside of library buildings and adds that considerations of customer convenience are a mistake that will sound the death knell of public libraries (“Rush to the breadline?” Feedback, LJ 9/1/14, p. 12).
I’ll be the first to admit that the list of innovations suggested for public libraries over the years would include a few dead-ended fads. To me, it seems that public libraries have always been all about convenience: catalogs for the public, telephone reference, services in multiple languages, even putting reading lights on the study carrels are all “convenient” services that we started offering many decades ago. And speaking of telephone reference, that’s certainly a well-established service to off-site customers.
I don’t see why we should stop trying to make our services more convenient, or stop trying to innovate now, after so many years of it.
Libraries get political and financial support to the extent that they just work for people. And our customers get to decide when that is, not us.
—Roger Hiles, Lib. Svcs. Mgr.,Arcadia P.L., CA
Ready to advocate
I’m entering an MLIS program next week. I couldn’t agree more that we students “should be ready and able to say what libraries bring to society” (Rebecca T. Miller, “The Degree We Need,” Editorial, LJ 9/1/14, p. 8).
After taking a [massive open online course] this summer on library advocacy, it seems that understanding the value of libraries is an essential part of bolstering the profession and—perhaps more important—letting students like me articulate why they are dedicating their life to this line of work.
—David Sprague, Student, Univ. of Toronto
Corrections
Missing from the review of Race and Racism in the United States: An Encyclopedia of the American Mosaic (LJ 10/1/14, p. 112) is the reviewer’s byline: Rob Tench, Old Dominion Univ. Lib., Norfolk, VA. LJ regrets the error.
The social sciences review of award-winning journalist Kirstin Downey’s Isabella: The Warrior Queen (LJ 9/15/14, p. 88) misidentified Queen Isabella’s birth date. She was born in 1451. LJ apologizes for the error.