Terms of service, cramped budgets, and good library citizenship: the Netflix dilemma

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to explore the implications of libraries using Netflix to supplement their own audiovisual collections. Design/methodology/approach -A review of the current discussion regarding breaking terms of service is presented along with several complications that arise from libraries disregarding the Netflix terms of service agreement. Findings -The problem of providing patrons with access to materials that the library cannot afford to purchase and which cannot be acquired via interlibrary loan has no simple answer. Librarians may be in a unique position to encourage changes to terms of service that may be more friendly to lending institutions, but only if they do not squander their legitimacy by disregarding current terms. Research limitations/implications -Most of the conversation is based on anecdote and recent practice. Very little has been written on how to fix this problem. Practical implications -This paper brings this issue to the forefront in an effort to engage librarians in a discussion about the ethical, practical and legal implications of breaking terms of service in the pursuit of serving patrons. Social implications -The culture of library practice could be affected by this issue, and may have wider ramifications in terms of future copyright, licensing, and terms of service agreements. Originality/value -The paper is timely, addressing a current question and debate within their field. It proposes that librarians should find solutions only after seriously considering the legal, ethical, and economic implications of their actions.As libraries face continued budget cuts, staff attrition, and increased demand from users whose budgets are similarly strapped, librarians and other service managers are forced to develop new and interesting methods for acquiring materials. As collections budgets are cut, interlibrary loan requests soar. At the same time, enrollments at many universities and colleges are increasing, placing heavier demands on library collections. In nearly all cases, there is simply not enough money to go around, and something has to give.It is no wonder, then, that libraries are looking to other lending services to supplement their own collections. Recently, there has been much discussion of libraries taking advantage of Netflix subscriptions to augment lending of materials. Given the fragile nature of audiovisual materials such as DVDs, the prohibitive cost of acquiring The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

Finding Alternative Sources of Revenue

“…The trick is how to do it without negatively impacting customer service. Recent publications have described cost savings from outsourcing (Matsuoka-Motley, 2011), cloud computing (Han, 2010;Malpas, 2011), using Netflix to supplement libraries' audiovisual collections (Harris, 2010;Healy, 2010), buying used books for collections (Staley & Palo, 2010), reevaluating standing orders (Cross, 2010), and using free online tools instead of buying software or apps (Maxymuk, 2009;Rapp, 2011). A study by Nicholas, Rowlands, Jubb, and Jamali (2010) addressed sharing resources and increasing cooperation among libraries, putting pressure on vendors over pricing, directing users to free content through openaccess sources, and accelerating the move from print to digital (under the assumption that electronic is cheaper, which Nicholas et al question).…”

Streaming availability and library circulation : an exploratory study

“…Research to date regarding streaming video services and libraries has focused on the use and consequences of Netflix as an alternative to lending. Harris (2010) notes that for many libraries, given "the widespread practice of excluding audiovisual materials from interlibrary loan, acquiring a Netflix subscription appears to be the perfect solution" (p. 212). Modern libraries are faced with collection development challenges that are not easily resolved through traditional librarianship practices.…”

“…The combination of a service that is difficult to monitor with a fiscal climate that leaves librarians clamoring for alternative solutions could "hurt library legitimacy" (Harris, 2010). Hoek (2013), writing in American Libraries, bemoans the limitations of these term of service agreements, writing that "if libraries continue only to work within the narrower and narrower range of what licenses allow, we may just be abiding ourselves into obsolescence, while also submitting to the diminution of the very freedoms that are in our care."…”