Alternatives to Licensing of E-Resources

Abstract

As libraries continue to increase the amount of content purchased in electronic format, the convention of signing a license agreement for each electronic product has become overly burdensome for both libraries and publishers. The delays inherent in this process have also created barriers to access for patrons. The NISO Shared E-Resource Understanding (SERU) working group was formed in 2006 to develop a best practices alternative that will allow libraries and publishers to avoid licenses for some types of electronic resources by agreeing to the "Statements of Common Understandings for Subscribing to Electronic Resources" outlined on the NISO web site (http://www.niso.org/committees/SERU). This report summarizes the history of the project and outlines next steps for libraries and publishers.

Driven adaptation: A grounded theory study of licensing electronic resources

“…Content providers accept a complete library license only occasionally (typically small publishers who have not developed their own license agreements), but these model licenses record important organizational knowledge and provide guidance for negotiation. Moreover, an increasing number of academic libraries have endorsed Shared Electronic Resource Understanding (SERU), a best practice recommended by the National Information Standards Organization (NISO), to replace license agreements (Rolnik, Lamoureux, & Smith, 2008). Although SERU has not been accepted by many content providers, licensing librarians believe recommending it repeatedly will help the profession make their concerns heard over time.…”

Adoption of NISO’s Shared Electronic Resource Understanding (SERU) at US Academic Libraries

“…A departure from copyright law towards executed agreements was partly due to uncertainty content providers felt about their previously static and stationary content possibly destined for wider dissemination on the internet. 1 Early library licensing began with CD-ROMs and computer software programs leaving "little doubt that whatever rights were guaranteed by federal, state, and local laws, signing the contract eliminated them." 2 Since contracts can eliminate rights allowed by copyright law, questions and discussions ensued regarding how to navigate contracts rather than copyright.…”

“…20 A small publisher could spend over $10,000 to draft a license for an e-resource product. 21 Staff time from non-library employees, such as legal counsel or procurement staff, also increases expenses. 22 The number of licenses and amendments a library signs annually depends on the number of e-resources the library acquires (corresponding with a library's acquisitions budget).…”

Licensed to Share: How Libraries Are Handling Electronic Journal Article Requests

“…• Walk away from negotiations if you disagree with the terms • Communicate the need for ILL rights with the library's license negotiator • Negotiate the best terms for resources that are heavily used by ILL As an alternative to licenses, Rolnik, Lamoureux, and Smith (2008) explain how libraries and publishers can agree to the "Statements of Common Understandings for Subscribing to Electronic Resources" which was developed by the NISO Shared E-Resource Understanding (SERU) working group. This working group was formed in 2006 to develop "Recommended Practices" that help publishers sell e-resources without licenses as long as their "perception of risk has been adequately addressed by current law and developing norms of behavior" (niso.org/workrooms/seru/wg).…”