Harris's Licensing Digital Content

This week, we finished reading Lesley Ellen Harris's Licensing Digital Content: A Practical Guide for Librarians (2nd ed.). This book is a good introduction to the nitty-gritty details of licensing in a library setting. It has a very practical focus and would make a good reference book if you were ever to find yourself in a situation where you needed to negotiate a license. I am sure any librarian making acquisition decisions, especially those new to doing so, could learn something from this book.

The bulk of the book outlines the need-to-know aspects of licensing. It has a very introductory and sometimes encyclopedic feel. Key digital licensing clauses and boilerplate clauses each get their own chapters. Chapter 1 "When to License" provides a nice introduction to both the book and licensing in general. However, it seems like many librarians will know when to license, as someone or something is pushing for service--some parts feel a little redundant or obvious. Some of the more interesting parts in this chapter are key elements to look for when licensing, including ease of access, "one-stop" transactions, etc. Harris includes nice lists of things to watch out for when acquiring networked content. I find the section on model licenses very helpful because it lists many positive aspects of model licenses (for instance, industry consistency) and negative aspects (lack of flexibility). It would be good to keep these positive and negative characteristics in mind because they might be easy to miss when using a model license.

Other concepts covered that seemed less obvious included interlibrary loan, libraries being responsible for users, and global use of content. Interlibrary loan is often complicated enough without the additional layer of demands placed by varying licensing contracts. It's a good idea to try and keep those demands simple, so as to not make ILL overly complicated. Another important concern is libraries not being responsible for users. Harris makes a good point by saying that libraries should not promise something that they cannot enforce. If a library has no one to monitor patron use (they usually don't), then they should not agree to do so. I imagine that many content providers would prefer, and perhaps pressure, libraries into agreeing to monitor use. It is important to agree to only that which you can accomplish. Another good point made in the book is use on a global scale. This might mean licensing works that are found in other countries, but also allowing your own patrons to use content outside of your own country. I found myself thinking of my many grad student friends who did their dissertation research abroad and how different their experiences might have been if they could not have accessed UW's databases because they were in another country. Researchers travel abroad to do research frequently enough that it would be hard to ignore them as a patron group. Copyright concerns across countries are also important to keep in mind. There seem to be many places where licensing could go wrong if you were not aware of the various limitations that potentially come with licensed content.

I found Chapter 6 "Un-Intimidating Negotiations" to be one of the more interesting chapters in the book. Harris strikes a surprisingly positive note in this chapter. She takes a tone that most things are negotiable, even the presumed "non-negotiable" parts of a contract. (I think that what she means is that it never hurts to ask--you probably will get a no, but you might get a yes.) She does acknowledge that "Librarians often feel powerless entering into, and during the process of, negotiating. Content owners like publishers and aggregators seem to have all the money and plenty of potential customers (and therefore power), while librarians often have only limited resources. However in a negotiation, you are seeking an end result that works for both parties" (94). I completely agree with the first sentence there. I imagine that many librarians must look at negotiations as a lost cause--the Elseviers of the world have so much money and power, why would they negotiate in good faith with any library, large or small? Harris makes it seem that with good negotiation, libraries and content providers can get what they want out of any deal. My response is: Really? Then why are libraries up in arms over the mounting cost of digital content? I am sure that libraries can get what they want in a negotiation--eased ILL restriction, unlimited access for any user that walks into the library, global use, etc. I bet that the vendors would be happy to agree to those terms. But at what cost? You can only negotiate so much without it costing more and more. (Or alternatively, lose rights or access so that databases costs less.) Harris's peppy tone belies that fact that it is still very difficult to negotiate an inflated bottom line.

Or have libraries just not been clever enough to negotiate harder? I don't really think that is the case. Libraries want to provide as much access as they can afford to patrons who are entirely ignorant of cost. It really does seem like libraries are stick in between a rock and a hard place when it comes to balancing the needs of patrons while negotiating price and rights with content owners. Maybe I am just too pessimistic and cynical when it comes to discussions about vendors, rights, and cost.

All in all, though, I found Licensing Digital Content to be quite handy in a practical way. I think that I could make use of it if I were ever to find myself in a situation that required licensing digital content.