RE: ALA Panel on Perpetual Access - seeking input

[richards1000@comcast.net]

I agree with much that others have shared.  Here are my comments:

The trend in institutional arrangements seems to be toward 
substituting a perpetual access mediator (such as Portico for 
journals, and HathiTrust for monographs) for a direct arrangement 
with a publisher.  Mediator arrangements seem extremely 
efficient, but they entail loss of control and customization, as 
in any consortial arrangement.  They also pose the problem of 
holdouts: publishers of key works who refuse to participate with 
the mediator, and who will still require the costs of 
negotiation.  This new environment may have implications for 
libraries' human resources devoted to licensing and long-term 
preservation.

In addition, SERU provides a similar mediated arrangement for 
licensing, but SERU may be insufficient for perpetual access 
arrangements, since it may lack sufficient detail respecting that 
topic.  It may be desirable to create a more detailed SERU-like 
perpetual access license, for use with hold-out publishers who 
decline to participate in a perpetual access mediator, and which 
perpetual access mediators may wish to adopt.  Again, one will 
lose control and customization, and there may be holdouts from 
the SERU-type license, who will require full licensing.  Again, 
there may be human resources implications.

These changes also indicate a different role for major research 
libraries and library consortia: one of trusteeship or other 
manner of oversight, such as ensuring that the mediators comply 
with standards and Trusted Repositories Audit and Certification 
(TRAC).

Rob Richards

Robert C. Richards, Jr., J.D.*, M.A., M.S.L.I.S.
Philadelphia, PA
E-mail: richards1000@comcast.net
* Member, New York Bar, Retired Status