Category: access

Google Print contract, available for the reading

Posted on by jessamyn

If you’re curious just what libraries have agreed to with their Google Print arrangements, here’s one contract [pdf] that is available online [linked from here, which is linked from here, yes, I was surprised too]. In short, it outlines what can, can’t, and must be done with the Google Digital Copy and the University of Michigan’s Digital Copy of the scanned information. In short, the digital copies of public domain works are not public domain. I’m sure no one is suprised by this, but the phrase “land grab” does come to mind as I read this contract. Of particular note:

  • UM needs to find a way to restrict automated access, downloading of its content, or others making its content available for commercial purposes. This is more restrictive than public domain.
  • Further UM agrees to restrict use of its content to “persons having a need to access such materials” and makes particular mention to those materials not being “disseminated to the public at large” this m ay be nothing serious, or it may be
  • Google is a third party beneficiary of any agreement UM enters into with regards to the UM Digital Copy and any cooperative web service agreement such as the Digital Library Federation
  • Google agrees to always make searching and showing search results of the content free.

It’s fascinating reading. I am certainly not a lawyer or copyright expert, I would be very interested in what other people have to say about this.

why don’t we say more about Bush’s information ethics?

Posted on by jessamyn

Also from Library Juice, why isn’t ALA or any other large organization taking on some of the more egregious affronts to free access to information perpetuated by the Bush Administration? My guess? ALAs non-profit status and their fear of protecting it are going to make it difficult for them to challenge the administration’s policies even when these policies run counter to the continued operation of our profession. That’s a real drag.

Secrecy, propaganda and disinformation represent three core evils in government from an information ethics point of view. As such, they are the aspects of Bush administration policy and practice that ALA is eminently justified in publicly addressing.

the web for the blind, or the clueless

Posted on by jessamyn

I spent some time today with three novice computer users. Two were fairly bright people who were challenged but ultimately victorious in their struggles with the mouse and with Windows. One had a lot of trouble scanning a web page to look for whatever the “action item” was that she had to click on. So, finding the “send” button on her email, finding the “attach file” button after browsing for a file, or finding the “log off” button were very frustrating and took minutes for her each time.

This corroborates what we know about novice users, or users with cognitive impairments: they read every word on a web page and have a hard time getting the hang of cues that are communicated with colors or other subtle indicators. For them, web-based email like Yahoo [with its enormous ads and complicated interface] is more of a punishment than a pleasure. No wonder people still use AOL. This is just really a roundabout way of passing on a few links about accessibility:

threats to digital information

Posted on by jessamyn

JD Lasica’s list of Top 10 assaults on digital liberties could just as easily be titled “Top 10 assaults on digital libraries” as diglet rightly points out. Of particular note to libraries is #10. I’ve been hearing more and more about libraries being strongarmed into consortia that requires them to forego IT and filtering decisionmaking, independent collection development and in some cases even in-house cataloging staff. Keep your eyes open to changed in your digital information environment, and the legislation that constantly surrounds it, so that you can be an advocate for access by your patrons.